Metabolome profile variations in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) resistant and susceptible genotypes incited by rust (Uromyces appendiculatus)

Abstract

The causal agent of rust, Uromyces appendiculatus is a major constraint for common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) production. This pathogen causes substantial yield losses in many common bean production areas worldwide. U. appendiculatus is widely distributed and although there have been numerous breakthroughs in breeding for resistance, its ability to mutate and evolve still poses a major threat to common bean production. An understanding of plant phytochemical properties can aid in accelerating breeding for rust resistance. In this study, metabolome profiles of two common bean genotypes Teebus-RR-1 (resistant) and Golden Gate Wax (susceptible) were investigated for their response to U. appendiculatus races (1 and 3) at 14- and 21-days post-infection (dpi) using liquid chromatography-quadrupole time-of-flight tandem mass spectrometry (LC-qTOF-MS). Non-targeted data analysis revealed 71 known metabolites that were putatively annotated, and a total of 33 were statistically significant. Key metabolites including flavonoids, terpenoids, alkaloids and lipids were found to be incited by rust infections in both genotypes. Resistant genotype as compared to the susceptible genotype differentially enriched metabolites including aconifine, D-sucrose, galangin, rutarin and others as a defence mechanism against the rust pathogen. The results suggest that timely response to pathogen attack by signalling the production of specific metabolites can be used as a strategy to understand plant defence. This is the first study to illustrate the utilization of metabolomics to understand the interaction of common bean with rust.

Defence-related metabolic changes in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) seedlings in response to infection by Puccinia graminis f. sp. tritici

“…The OPLS-DA score-plots further showed clear discrimination between the treated samples and control whereas S-plots allowed for the extraction of significant biomarkers ( Figure 4 ). This observation is in agreement with previous works on wheat ( Rudd et al., 2015 ; Cuperlovic-Culf et al., 2016 ; Duan et al., 2022 ; Mashabela et al., 2023 ), and other grains ( Tugizimana et al., 2019 ; Li et al., 2022 ; Makhumbila et al., 2023 ). Overall, the separations observed gave insight into the chemistry and the differential metabolite profiles occurring in response to interactions with varying types of microbes.…”

“…Additionally, a combination of metabolomics and other omics studies may/can lead to the development of biomarkers for resistance/tolerance checks. In previous studies on oat ( Avena sativa ) ( Li et al., 2022 ), sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor ) ( Tugizimana et al., 2019 ), wheat ( Triticum aestivum L), common bean ( Phaseolus vulgaris L) ( Makhumbila et al., 2023 ) among others, metabolomics has been used for comparative metabolomic phenotyping to identify biomarkers or metabolic signatures linked to varied response capacities shown in varieties with varied resistance potentials. Therefore, identifying biochemical changes of primary and especially secondary metabolites need to be considered when observing plant-pathogen interactions.…”

Eye Diseases: When the Solution Comes from Plant Alkaloids

“…But they are also involved in the response to abiotic stresses. It is widely believed that plant secondary metabolites are pivotal for environmental adaptation by supporting the growth of symbiotic organisms and providing protection toward biotic and abiotic stressors 4 , 5 , 6 .…”

Editorial: Plant secondary metabolites and their effects on environmental adaptation based on functional genomics

“…In the past, it was generally thought that PSMs were small biological molecules and non-essential for organism survival ( Speed et al, 2015 ; Li et al, 2020 ; Shi and Du, 2023 ). However, it is extensively accepted that PSMs play essential roles in environmental adaptation by providing protection against environmental stressors and supporting the growth of symbiotic organisms ( Li et al, 2021 ; Xu et al, 2022 ; Makhumbila et al, 2023 ).…”