Differences in Aceria tosichella population responses to wheat resistance genes and wheat virus transmission

Khalaf, Luaay Kahtan; Chuang, Wen-Po; Aguirre-Rojas, Lina M.; Klein, Peter S.; Smith, C. Michael

doi:10.1007/s11829-019-09717-9

Cited by 15 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many other insect pests are of importance in wheat production. The resistance gene Sm1, which acts against the orange wheat blossom midge (Sitodiplosis mosellana) has been deployed in Canada and Europe and four resistance genes (Cmc1-4) have been identified against the aforementioned wheat curl mite (A. tosichella) [183]. Other pests that are of concern to wheat production include the Sunn pest (Eurygaster integriceps), wheat stem sawfly (Cephus cinctus) (WSS) and the yellow wheat blossom midge (Contarinia tritici).…”

Section: Advances In Molecular Breeding For Insect Resistancementioning

confidence: 99%

Wheat genomics and breeding: bridging the gap.

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent technological advances in next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies have dramatically reduced the cost of DNA sequencing, allowing species with large and complex genomes to be sequenced. Although bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is one of the world's most important food crops, until very recently efficient exploitation of molecular marker-assisted breeding approaches has lagged behind that achieved in other crop species due to its large polyploid genome. However, an international public-private effort spanning nine years reported over 65% draft genome of bread wheat in 2014, and finally, after more than a decade culminated in the release of a gold-standard, fully annotated reference wheat genome assembly in 2017. Shortly thereafter, in 2020, the genome of assemblies of additional fifteen global wheat accessions were released. Wheat has now entered into the pan-genomic era where basic resources can be efficiently exploited. Wheat genotyping with a few hundred markers has been replaced by genotyping arrays capable of genotyping hundreds of wheat lines using thousands of markers, providing fast, relatively inexpensive, and reliable data for exploitation in wheat breeding. These advances have opened up a new horizon for marker-assisted selection (MAS) and genomic selection (GS) in wheat. Herein, we review the advances and perspectives in wheat genetics and genomics, with a focus on key traits including grain yield, yield-related traits, end-use quality and resistance to biotic and abiotic stresses. We also enlisted several reported candidate and cloned candidate genes responsible for the aforesaid traits of interest. Furthermore, we report on the improvement in the aforementioned quantitative traits through the use of (i) clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats/CRISPR-associated protein 9 (CRISPR/Cas9) mediated gene-editing, (ii) positional cloning methods, and of genomic selection. Finally, we make recommendations on the utilization of genomics for the next-generation wheat breeding and provide a practical example of using the latest, in silico bioinformatics tools that were based on the wheat reference genome sequence.

show abstract

Section: Advances In Molecular Breeding For Insect Resistancementioning

confidence: 99%

Wheat genomics and breeding: bridging the gap.

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Each head was kept separate in a plastic bag in order to distinguish genetic differences between mites within a field and a grain head. Mites from each location were previously classified as biotype 1 avirulent to Cmc3 or biotype 2 virulent to Cmc3 [47] using methods of Harvey et al [46].…”

Section: Sample Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Virulence in A. tosichella to Cmc3 has remained stable for the past 20 years [34] but recent field assessments [47] determined that 24% of A. tosichella collected from multiple locations in North America are virulent to Cmc3. Therefore, there is a real need for new information about the current geographic distribution of A. tosichella biotypes or genetic lineages throughout the U. S. Great Plains and the potential changes occurring in each.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modeling Aceria tosichella biotype distribution over geographic space and time

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The wheat curl mite, Aceria tosichella Keifer, one of the most destructive arthropod pests of bread wheat worldwide, inflicts significant annual reductions in grain yields. Moreover, A. tosichella is the only vector for several economically important wheat viruses in the Americas, Australia and Europe. To date, mite-resistant wheat genotypes have proven to be one of the most effective methods of controlling the A. tosichella-virus complex. Thus, it is important to elucidate A. tosichella population genetic structure, in order to better predict improved mite and virus management. Two genetically distinct A. tosichella lineages occur as pests of wheat in Australia, Europe, North America, South America and the Middle East. These lineages are known as type 1 and type 2 in Australia and North America and in Europe and South America as MT-8 and MT-1, respectively. Type 1 and type 2 mites in Australia and North America are delineated by internal transcribed spacer 1 region (ITS1) and cytochrome oxidase I region (COI) sequence differences. In North America, two A. tosichella genotypes known as biotypes are recognized by their response to the Cmc3 mite resistance gene in wheat. Aceria tosichella biotype 1 is susceptible to Cmc3 and biotype 2 is virulent to Cmc3. In this study, ITS1 and COI sequence differences in 25 different populations of A. tosichella of known biotype 1 or biotype 2 composition were characterized for ITS1 and COI sequence differences and used to model spatio-temporal dynamics based on biotype prevalence. Results showed that the proportion of biotype 1 and 2 varies both spatially and temporally. Greater ranges of cropland and grassland within 5000m of the sample site, as well as higher mean monthly precipitation during the month prior to sampling appear to reduce the probability of occurrence of biotype 1 and increase the probability of occurrence of biotype 2. The results suggest that spatio-temporal modeling can effectively improve A. tosichella management. Continual integration of additional current and future precipitation and ground cover data into the existing model will further improve the accuracy of predicting the occurrence of A. tosichella in annual wheat crops, allowing producers to make informed decisions about the selection of varieties with different A. tosichella resistance genes.

show abstract

“…Historically, plant virologists focused on viruses that cause disease in crops, but more recently it has been shown that viruses are asymptomatically very abundant in wild plants (Roossinck 2012. Further research on the role of viruses in wild plants has revealed details of virus-arthropod-plant relationships and indicated long-standing interactions among multiple partners (Khalaf et al, 2019;Wen-Po et al, 2017). Virus ecologists look at viruses as symbionts (Roossinck, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Be Smart to Survive: Virus-Host Relationships in Nature

Adhab

2021

J microb biotech food sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to survive in nature, different pathogens follow different procedures to manipulate their host plants for the pathogen favor. Plant viruses are not an exception of this rule. They are often found to alter the host plant traits in the way that affects the community of organisms in the host plant as well as the vectoring insects. It has been indicated that virus-infected plants are more preferable than virus-free plants with respect to the growth rates, longevity and reproduction of the vector. Viruses use several strategies in order to reprogram their host’s cell to make it more conducive to replication and spread. Consequently, phytohormone signaling pathway in virus-infected plants can be disrupted either directly or indirectly. In plants, there are hormone pathways contribute to all aspects of plant physiology. Sometimes, virus infection can be advantageous to the infected host by providing the plant with tolerance to biotic and abiotic stresses. This article summarizes some aspects where the virus found to reprogram the host’s cell to make it more conducive to virus’ cycle of life. It also provides an important basic knowledge about how biotic and abiotic stress affects the interaction among virus, vector and the host plant; this knowledge could open the gate to understand the effect of multi-stress effect on the host plant in future studies through recognizing the necessity for plants to have an integrated system of defense against different threats.

show abstract

Differences in Aceria tosichella population responses to wheat resistance genes and wheat virus transmission

Cited by 15 publications

References 50 publications

Wheat genomics and breeding: bridging the gap.

Wheat genomics and breeding: bridging the gap.

Modeling Aceria tosichella biotype distribution over geographic space and time

Be Smart to Survive: Virus-Host Relationships in Nature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About