Bedoukian   RussellIPM   RussellIPM   Piezoelectric Micro-Sprayer


Home
Animal Taxa
Plant Taxa
Semiochemicals
Floral Compounds
Semiochemical Detail
Semiochemicals & Taxa
Synthesis
Control
Invasive spp.
References

Abstract

Guide

Alphascents
Pherobio
InsectScience
E-Econex
Counterpart-Semiochemicals
Print
Email to a Friend
Kindly Donate for The Pherobase

« Previous AbstractSignal signature and transcriptome changes of Arabidopsis during pathogen and insect attack    Next AbstractVolatile Organic Compounds from Native Potato-associated Pseudomonas as Potential Anti-oomycete Agents »

Plant Signal Behav


Title:Plants under attack: multiple interactions with insects and microbes
Author(s):De Vos M; Van Oosten VR; Jander G; Dicke M; Pieterse CM;
Address:"Plant-Microbe Interactions; Institute of Environmental Biology; Department of Biology; Faculty of Science; Utrecht University; Utrecht, The Netherlands"
Journal Title:Plant Signal Behav
Year:2007
Volume:2
Issue:6
Page Number:527 - 529
DOI: 10.4161/psb.2.6.4663
ISSN/ISBN:1559-2316 (Print) 1559-2324 (Electronic) 1559-2316 (Linking)
Abstract:"To defend themselves, plants activate inducible defense mechanisms that are effective against the invader that is encountered. There is partial overlap in the defense signaling pathways that are induced by insect herbivores and microbial pathogens that may result in cross-resistance. We have previously shown that infestation by tissue-chewing Pieris rapae larvae induces resistance in Arabidopsis thaliana against subsequent attack by the microbial pathogens Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato (Pst), Xanthomonas campestris pv. armoraciae (Xca) and turnip crinkle virus (TCV). Phloem-feeding aphids, such as the generalist Myzus persicae, have a stealthy feeding strategy that is very different from chewing by lepidopteran larvae. Yet, M. persicae feeding results in a large transcriptomic change. Here, we report on the effectiveness of the defense response that is triggered by M. persicae infestation, as well as the sensitivity of M. persicae to microbially-induced resistance. M. persicae reproduction was not affected by prior conspecific feeding, nor was aphid-induced resistance effective against subsequent attack by Pst, Xca or TCV. Moreover, induced systemic resistance (ISR) triggered by beneficial Pseudomonas fluorescens rhizobacteria was not effective against M. persicae. However, systemic acquired resistance (SAR) induced by prior infection with avirulent Pst was associated with reduced aphid reproduction. These data provide insight into the effectiveness of pathogen and insect resistance and highlight the complexity of the defense responses that are triggered during multitrophic plant-attacker interactions"
Keywords:Arabidopsis Myzus persicae defense signaling induced resistance;
Notes:"PubMed-not-MEDLINEDe Vos, Martin Van Oosten, Vivian R Jander, Georg Dicke, Marcel Pieterse, Corne Mj eng 2007/11/01 Plant Signal Behav. 2007 Nov; 2(6):527-9. doi: 10.4161/psb.2.6.4663"

 
Back to top
 
Citation: El-Sayed AM 2024. The Pherobase: Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. <http://www.pherobase.com>.
© 2003-2024 The Pherobase - Extensive Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. Ashraf M. El-Sayed.
Page created on 22-09-2024