Differential gene expression in whiteflyBemisia tabaci‐infested tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) plants at progressing developmental stages of the insect's life cycle

Abstract

A suppression-subtractive-hybridization (SSH) strategy was used to identify genes whose expression was modified in response to virus-free whitefly Bemisia tabaci (Bt, biotype A) infestation in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) plants. Thus, forward and reverse SSH gene libraries were generated at four points in the whitefly's life cycle, namely at (1) 2 days (adult feeding and oviposition: phase I); (2) 7 days (mobile crawler stage: phase II); (3) 12 days (second to third instar nymphal transition: phase III) and (4) 18 days (fourth instar nymphal stage: phase IV). The 169 genes with altered expression (up and downregulated) that were identified in the eight generated SSH libraries, together with 75 additional genes that were selected on the basis of their involvement in resistance responses against phytofagous insects and pathogens, were printed on a Nexterion(®) Slide MPX 16 to monitor their pattern of expression at the above phases. The results indicated that Bt infestation in tomato led to distinctive phase-specific expression/repression patterns of several genes associated predominantly with photosynthesis, senescence, secondary metabolism and (a)biotic stress. Most of the gene expression modifications were detected in phase III, coinciding with intense larval feeding, whereas fewer changes were detected in phases I and IV. These results complement previously reported gene expression profiles in Bt-infested tomato and Arabidopisis, and support and expand the opinion that Bt infestation leads to the downregulation of specific defense responses in addition to those controlled by jasmonic acid.

Inoculation of tomato plants (Solanum lycopersicum) with growth-promoting Bacillus subtilis retards whitefly Bemisia tabaci development

“…Small-scale microarray analysis of gene expression in Wt tomato plants: response to BsDN colonization Complementary DNAs were synthesized from pooled leaf RNA derived from three independent experiments in which plants were collected 21 days after infestation with B. tabaci, with or without prior root colonization by BsDN, and were tested on a small-scale microarray containing 244 genes, many of which were derived from eight SSH libraries previously generated from B. tabaciinfested tomato plants at four different stages of the insect's life cycle (Estrada-Hernández et al 2009). According to the stringency levels applied (FDR B 0.1 and Fold ± 1.7), a total of 80 genes showed differential expression in at least one of the three treatments examined.…”

“…A total of 244 clones were selected for the gene expression analysis: 169 of them were derived from eight subtractive hybridization libraries (SSH) (Estrada-Hernández et al 2009) and 75 were dedicated clones (primers were designed using the TOM1 array) that were chosen as markers of oxidative stress, carbohydrate metabolism, and the jasmonic acid (JA), salicylic acid (SA) and ethylene (ET) signal transduction pathways. The microarray slide was printed on Nexterion Ò Slide MPX 16 (amino surface coating; Schott North America, Louisville, KY, USA).…”

A Jasmonate-Inducible Defense Trait Transferred from Wild into Cultivated Tomato Establishes Increased Whitefly Resistance and Reduced Viral Disease Incidence

“…It is known that the whitefly B. tabaci can alter plant hormone-mediated responses in infested tomato plants by promoting induction of SA-mediated defenses while suppressing JA defense responses (Zarate et al, 2007; Estrada-Hernández et al, 2009; Puthoff et al, 2010). Whiteflies are phloem feeding insects alleged to be experts in avoiding and manipulating JA-mediated plant defense responses.…”

Species-specific effects on salicylic acid content and subsequent Myzus persicae (Sulzer) performance by three phloem-sucking insects infesting Nicotiana tabacum L.

“…The infested third and uninfested fifth leaves were considered local versus systemic leaves, respectively (Dugravot et al 2007). Leaves from the same positions on uninfested plants were sampled as controls.…”