Characterization and Expression of Caffeoyl-Coenzyme A 3-O-Methyltransferase Proposed for the Induced Resistance Response of Vitis vinifera L

Abstract

Cell-suspension cultures of Vitis vinifera L. cv Pinot Noir accumulated resveratrol upon fungal elicitation, and the activity of S-adenosyl-i-methi0nine:trans-caffeoyl-coenzyme A 3-O-methyltransferase (CCoAOMT), yielding feruloyl-COA, increased to a transient maximum at 12 to 15 h. CCoAOMT cDNA was cloned from the elicited cells and was shown to encode a polypeptide highly homologous to CCoAOMTs from cells of Petroselinum species or Zinnia species. The expression of the cDNA i n Escherichia coli revealed that grapevine CCoAOMT methylates both caffeoyland 5-hydroxyferuloyl-coenzyme A and is probably involved in phenolic esterification and lignification. Commercial plant activators induce the disease-resistance response of test plants and are considered to mimic the action of salicylic acid. Among these chemicals, 2,6-dichloroisonicotinic acid and benzo(l,2,3)-thiadiazole-7-carbothioic acid S-methyl ester provoke systemic acquired resistance (SAR) and were also shown to induce the expression of class III chitinase i n grapevine. The SAR response is classified by an unchanged phenotype of tissues, but the mechanistic basis is unknown. Treatment of the cultured V. vinifera cells with either fungal elicitor or low concentrations of salicylic acid and 2,6-dichloroisonicotinic acid, respectively, raised the CCoAOMT or stilbene synthase transcript abundance, suggesting that grapevine is capable of the SAR response, whereas benzo(l,2,3)-thiadiazole-7-carbothioic acid S-methyl ester was ineffective. The data imply for the first time (to our knowledge) that the expression of phenylpropanoid genes in grapevine i s induced by SAR activators without phenotypic consequences and suggest a role for CCoAOMT and stilbene synthase in the disease-resistance response leading beyond the leve1 of pathogenesis-related proteins as markers of the SAR.Plants respond to local fungal infection by the activation of various defense measures in the challenged tissues, and the induction of phenylpropanoid pathways appears to play a crucial role in this response (Hahlbrock and Scheel, 1989). The activation causes the short-term accumulation of phenolic metabolites, which might possess potent antimycotic activity as such or may protect the cells indirectly after incorporation into the cell wall. The phenolic materi-

A Novel Mg2+-dependent O-Methyltransferase in the Phenylpropanoid Metabolism of Mesembryanthemum crystallinum

“…This strongly suggests that the PFOMT may indeed be involved in the methylation of these compounds. Similar responses to biotic or abiotic stresses have been observed on the transcript level for several other CCoAOMT-like genes (36,44,46,47).…”

A Novel Cation-DependentO-Methyltransferase Involved in Anthocyanin Methylation in Grapevine

“…However, some type 2 OMTs are also active with flavonoids and/or phenylpropanoid conjugates (Ibdah et al, 2003;Kim et al, 2006;Lee et al, 2008). The candidate AOMT presented 56% and 54% identity with PFOMT from M. crystallinum (Ibdah et al, 2003) and caffeoylCoA-OMT (CCoA-OMT) from grapevine (Busam et al, 1997), respectively (Fig. 1A).…”

Isolation and characterization of CCoAOMT in interspecific hybrid of Acacia auriculiformis x Acacia mangium - a key gene in lignin biosynthesis

“…Substrate affinity analysis has revealed that CCoAOMT shows higher methylation rate with caffeoyl-CoA than 5-hydroxyferuloyl-CoA (Ye et al, 1994;Busam et al, 1997;Martz et al, 1998;Zhong et al, 2000). CCoAOMT is reported to exist in a multigene family that can be grouped into class I and II (Raes et al, 2003).…”

“…It has been reported that this gene is encoded by one to two members in parsley (Grimmig and Matern, 1997), grapevine (Busam et al, 1997), alfalfa (Inoue et al, 1998) and aspen (Meng and Campbell, 1998), five to ten members in zinnia (Ye et al, 1994), and seven members in Arabidopsis (Raes et al, 2003). There are three classes of CCoAOMT in tobacco, and it was suggested that each class plays a role at different stages of lignification (Maury et al, 1999).…”