2001
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-313x.2001.01050.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Resistance to Pseudomonas syringae conferred by an Arabidopsis thaliana coronatine‐insensitive (coi1) mutation occurs through two distinct mechanisms

Abstract: SummaryA new allele of the coronatine-insensitive locus (COI1) was isolated in a screen for Arabidopsis thaliana mutants with enhanced resistance to the bacterial pathogen Pseudomonas syringae. This mutant, designated coi1-20, exhibits robust resistance to several P. syringae isolates but remains susceptible to the virulent pathogens Erisyphe and cauli¯ower mosaic virus. Resistance to P. syringae strain PstDC3000 in coi1-20 plants is correlated with hyperactivation of PR-1 expression and accumulation of elevat… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

27
292
2
1

Year Published

2002
2002
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 310 publications
(322 citation statements)
references
References 74 publications
27
292
2
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In this pathosystem, it is thought that pathogen-secreted COR acts as a mimic of endogenous JA signaling, to suppress SA-dependent defense and promote disease susceptibility. The lack of disease in COR-producing P. syringae-inoculated coi1 plants has been shown to be associated with a faster and stronger induction of PR1, and with an increased accumulation of SA, compared with wild-type plants (Feys et al, 1994;Kloek et al, 2001). In contrast, our experiments revealed that coi1-mediated F. oxysporum resistance was not a result of SA-dependent defense, as coi1/NahG plants were free from lesion development, and were indistinguishable from coi1 plants.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 51%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In this pathosystem, it is thought that pathogen-secreted COR acts as a mimic of endogenous JA signaling, to suppress SA-dependent defense and promote disease susceptibility. The lack of disease in COR-producing P. syringae-inoculated coi1 plants has been shown to be associated with a faster and stronger induction of PR1, and with an increased accumulation of SA, compared with wild-type plants (Feys et al, 1994;Kloek et al, 2001). In contrast, our experiments revealed that coi1-mediated F. oxysporum resistance was not a result of SA-dependent defense, as coi1/NahG plants were free from lesion development, and were indistinguishable from coi1 plants.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 51%
“…Although it is not known if coi1 provides resistance to all F. oxysporum strains that are pathogenic on Arabidopsis, our results, and those of others (A. Diener, 13th Congress on Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions, 2007, Department of Molecular, Cell and Development Biology, University of California, LA, USA), suggest that coi1 resistance is not limited to any particular strain of F. oxysporum. The coi1 mutant also fails to develop chlorotic disease symptoms in response to inoculation with COR-producing P. syringae (Feys et al, 1994;Kloek et al, 2001). In this pathosystem, it is thought that pathogen-secreted COR acts as a mimic of endogenous JA signaling, to suppress SA-dependent defense and promote disease susceptibility.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The F. oxysporum effector Fo5176-SECRETED IN XYLEM4 also promotes increased disease symptom development through a mechanism yet to be discovered, but it is suggested it may act with other Fo5176 effectors to activate components of the JA-signaling pathway (Thatcher et al, 2012). Other isolates of F. oxysporum and Pseudomonas syringae seem to target host JA signaling by secreting oxylipins or coronatine that mimic the host's endogenous JA signal (Miersch et al, 1999;Kloek et al, 2001;Katsir et al, 2008;Thatcher et al, 2009). These studies detail a common theme where pathogens selectively target host susceptibility genes to cause disease.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this case, the absence of gene activation in one mutant could be due to lack of activation functions sensitive to this pathway. Alternatively, because both pathways display mutual antagonistic interactions (Schenk et al, 2000;Kloek et al, 2001;Glazebrook et al, 2003;Spoel et al, 2003), the absence of gene activation could be due to active signaling by the opposite pathway. In this case, repression or lack of induction of genes from Group 3 in infected jar1-1 plants could be due to exacerbation of SA-sensitive responses, whereas down-regulation of genes from Smith et al (2004).…”
Section: Experimental Systemmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Under several infection conditions, the SA and JA/ET pathways display mutual repression mechanisms (Schenk et al, 2000;Kloek et al, 2001;Glazebrook et al, 2003;Spoel et al, 2003;Bostock, 2005). These pathways regulate host responses in a variety of ways depending on the timing and magnitude of JA/ET and SA accumulation, as well as cross-talk between these pathways and with other yet-unknown regulatory mechanisms (De Vos et al, 2005).…”
Section: Changes Independent From Npr1 and Jar1mentioning
confidence: 99%