Mechanisms of resistance in postharvest fruit-pathogen interaction

Sandoval-Chávez, Rocío Aurora; Martínez-Peniche, Ramón Álvar; Hernández‐Iturriaga, Montserrat; Teixidó-Espasa, Neus; Usall-Rodié, Josep; Viñas-Almenar, Inmaculada; Torres-Sanchis, Rosario

doi:10.5154/r.rchsh.2014.11.050

Cited by 7 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A possible explanation is that the enzyme is located exclusively in plastids and is released into the cytosol after damage, senescence, or deterioration of the organ [ 26 ], which would explain the considerable increase in PPO activity in fruits inoculated by N. haematococca compared to the control, due to the fact that the pathogen caused damage or deterioration in the soursop fruits. When the pathogen is able to overcome the host’s protective responses, it leads to localized necrosis in the fruits [ 27 ]. Moreover, the fruit recognizes specific elicitors of the pathogen and activates the defense mechanisms that lead to the hypersensitive response (HR) in the fruit.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The fruits can tolerate pathogens through physical and chemical barriers, or through induced defenses that are activated once the host detects the presence of the pathogen, triggering the oxidative explosion during the first hours of the interaction. This reaction leads to the generation of ROS such as superoxide (O 2− ) and or hydrogen peroxide (H 2 O 2 ) [ 27 ]. In turn, pathogens also produce reactive oxygen species to increase their virulence [ 33 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Differential Responses of Antioxidative System during the Interaction of Soursop Fruits (Annona muricata L.) and Nectria haematococca at Postharvest Storage

Rubio-Melgarejo

Balois-Morales

Ochoa-Jiménez

et al. 2021

Plants

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Soursop fruit (Annona muricata L.) production is diminished by the attack of pathogens such as Nectria haematococca. However, the fruit–pathogen interaction at the biochemical and molecular levels is still unknown. The objective of this study was to analyze the response of the soursop fruit to the presence of N. haematococca during postharvest storage. Soursop fruits were inoculated with the pathogen and total phenolic compounds, antioxidant capacity by Ferric reducing/antioxidant power (FRAP), 2,2′-azinobis-(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonate) (ABTS•+), and 2,2′-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl radical (DPPH•), as well as enzymatic activity and transcript levels of polyphenol oxidase (PPO) and superoxide dismutase (SOD), were evaluated at 1, 3, and 5 days of storage. The noninoculated fruits were the controls of the experiment. The highest total phenol content was recorded on day one in the inoculated fruits. FRAP, ABTS, and DPPH activity presented the highest values on day three in the control fruits. Inoculated fruits recorded the highest PPO activity on day five and a five-fold induction in the PPO transcript on day three. SOD activity showed a decrease during the days of storage and 10-fold induction of SOD transcript on day three in the inoculated fruits. Principal component analysis showed that total phenols were the variable that contributed the most to the observed variations. Furthermore, a positive correlation between total phenols and SOD activity, PPO expression, and SOD expression, as well as between DPPH and FRAP, was recorded. The results showed a differential response in antioxidant capacity, enzymatic activity, and gene expression during the interaction of soursop fruits–N. haematococca at postharvest storage.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differential Responses of Antioxidative System during the Interaction of Soursop Fruits (Annona muricata L.) and Nectria haematococca at Postharvest Storage

Rubio-Melgarejo

Balois-Morales

Ochoa-Jiménez

et al. 2021

Plants

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some studies have indicated that during HR activity, some enzymes—such as PAL, polyphenol oxidase (PPO), and peroxidase (POX)—are elevated [84,85]. As described above, PAL is a main enzyme involved in the production of PCs [7].…”

Section: Role Of Pcs In Plant Defense Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plant Cell Cancer: May Natural Phenolic Compounds Prevent Onset and Development of Plant Cell Malignancy? A Literature Review

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phenolic compounds (PCs) are known as a chemically diverse category of secondary and reactive metabolites which are produced in plants via the shikimate-phenylpropanoid pathways. These compounds-ubiquitous in plants-are an essential part of the human diet, and are of considerable interest due to their antioxidant properties. Phenolic compounds are essential for plant functions, because they are involved in oxidative stress reactions, defensive systems, growth, and development. A large body of cellular and animal evidence carried out in recent decades has confirmed the anticancer role of PCs. Phytohormones-especially auxins and cytokinins-are key contributors to uncontrolled growth and tumor formation. Phenolic compounds can prevent plant growth by the endogenous regulation of auxin transport and enzymatic performance, resulting in the prevention of tumorigenesis. To conclude, polyphenols can reduce plant over-growth rate and the development of tumors in plant cells by regulating phytohormones. Future mechanistic studies are necessary to reveal intracellular transcription and transduction agents associated with the preventive role of phenolics versus plant pathological malignancy cascades.

show abstract

“…Intrinsically, most agricultural products possess defense mechanisms that can be triggered in response to the attack of pathogenic microorganisms and can be induced by the application of exogenous compounds that are Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS). The defense mechanisms have an elicitor effect, which includes the activation of induced local resistance (only in the infected area) and induced systemic resistance (in the whole fruit) (Figure 1) [7][8][9]. Information on the defense mechanisms of the fruit and those compounds with elicitor activity on the avocado fruit is scarce and dispersed, focusing mainly on physiological and quality aspects of the treated fruit.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-Chemical Treatments for the Pre- and Post-Harvest Elicitation of Defense Mechanisms in the Fungi–Avocado Pathosystem

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The greatest challenge for the avocado (Persea americana Miller) industry is to maintain the quality of the fruit to meet consumer requirements. Anthracnose is considered the most important disease in this industry, and it is caused by different species of the genus Colletotrichum, although other pathogens can be equally important. The defense mechanisms that fruit naturally uses can be triggered in response to the attack of pathogenic microorganisms and also by the application of exogenous elicitors in the form of GRAS compounds. The elicitors are recognized by receptors called PRRs, which are proteins located on the avocado fruit cell surface that have high affinity and specificity for PAMPs, MAMPs, and DAMPs. The activation of defense-signaling pathways depends on ethylene, salicylic, and jasmonic acids, and it occurs hours or days after PTI activation. These defense mechanisms aim to drive the pathogen to death. The application of essential oils, antagonists, volatile compounds, chitosan and silicon has been documented in vitro and on avocado fruit, showing some of them to have elicitor and fungicidal effects that are reflected in the postharvest quality of the fruit and a lower incidence of diseases. The main focus of these studies has been on anthracnose diseases. This review presents the most relevant advances in the use of natural compounds with antifungal and elicitor effects in plant tissues.

show abstract

Mechanisms of resistance in postharvest fruit-pathogen interaction

Cited by 7 publications

References 52 publications

Differential Responses of Antioxidative System during the Interaction of Soursop Fruits (Annona muricata L.) and Nectria haematococca at Postharvest Storage

Differential Responses of Antioxidative System during the Interaction of Soursop Fruits (Annona muricata L.) and Nectria haematococca at Postharvest Storage

Plant Cell Cancer: May Natural Phenolic Compounds Prevent Onset and Development of Plant Cell Malignancy? A Literature Review

Non-Chemical Treatments for the Pre- and Post-Harvest Elicitation of Defense Mechanisms in the Fungi–Avocado Pathosystem

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About