A Review on Transcriptional Responses of Interactions between Insect Vectors and Plant Viruses

Abstract

This review provides a synopsis of transcriptional responses pertaining to interactions between plant viruses and the insect vectors that transmit them in diverse modes. In the process, it attempts to catalog differential gene expression pertinent to virus–vector interactions in vectors such as virus reception, virus cell entry, virus tissue tropism, virus multiplication, and vector immune responses. Whiteflies, leafhoppers, planthoppers, and thrips are the main insect groups reviewed, along with aphids and leaf beetles. Much of the focus on gene expression pertinent to vector–virus interactions has centered around whole-body RNA extraction, whereas data on virus-induced tissue-specific gene expression in vectors is limited. This review compares transcriptional responses in different insect groups following the acquisition of non-persistent, semi-persistent, and persistent (non-propagative and propagative) plant viruses and identifies parallels and divergences in gene expression patterns. Understanding virus-induced changes in vectors at a transcriptional level can aid in the identification of candidate genes for targeting with RNAi and/or CRISPR editing in insect vectors for management approaches.

Transcriptome Analysis of Sugarcane Response to Sugarcane Yellow Leaf Virus Infection Transmitted by the Vector Melanaphis sacchari

“…Studies have shown that peroxisomes play an essential role in the infective host of psychopathologic fungi, especially the PEX gene involved in the formation and proliferation of peroxisomes, which has been identified in plant pathogens ( Catto et al, 2022 ). In the RNA-Seq data, PEX5 (TRINITY_DN47657_c0_g1) and PEX13 (TRINITY_DN55678_c1_g4 and TRINITY_DN55678_c1_g6) were upregulated, but PEX10 (TRINITY_DN64418_c1_g3) was downregulated.…”

“…Aphids, whiteflies, planthoppers, thrips, leaf beetles, and leafhoppers are the major vectors in the transmission of most of the viruses in plants ( Catto et al, 2022 ). M. sacchari transmits the SCYLV in most of the tropical and subtropical regions in a persistent and circulative manner ( Chinnaraja and Viswanathan, 2015 ).…”

Differential Transmission of Old and New World Begomoviruses by Middle East-Asia Minor 1 (MEAM1) and Mediterranean (MED) Cryptic Species of Bemisia tabaci

“…The current study showed that the circulative movement of OW (TYLCV) and NW (CuLCrV and SiGMV) begomoviruses within B. tabaci MED differed in their ability to cross the midgut barrier. During circulative movement within B. tabaci , begomoviruses interact with many vector receptors, immune proteins, and/or symbionts’ proteins located at MG, hemolymph, and PSG [ 48 , 98 , 99 , 100 ]. For instance, two B. tabaci MEAM1 midgut proteins, viz., BtCUBN and amnionless (BtAMN), form a BtCubam receptor complex that binds to the capsid protein of TYLCV, resulting in clathrin-mediated endocytosis of TYLCV into whitefly midgut cells [ 101 ].…”

Differential Transcriptional Responses in Two Old World Bemisia tabaci Cryptic Species Post Acquisition of Old and New World Begomoviruses

“…Whiteflies have an innate immune system that has been documented against pathogens [103,104]. The RNA interference (RNAi) pathway is the major mechanism insects use against virus infection [43]. In addition, other innate antimicrobial pathways such as Imd, Toll, JAK-STAT, phagocytosis, apoptosis, and proteolysis were reported to play crucial roles in insects' (Diptera and Lepidoptera) antiviral responses [105][106][107].…”

“…Begomovirus infections were reported to influence vector preference and fitness in different ways depending on the host plant [39][40][41][42]. However, the mechanisms involved in such begomoviruses-induced macro-effects on their whitefly vectors are not well understood, and high throughput sequencing platforms have been utilized to understand virus-associated macro-effects on whiteflies [43].…”