Over the years, several studies have been performed to analyse plant–pathogen interactions. Recently, functional genomic strategies, including proteomics and transcriptomics, have contributed to the effort of defining gene and protein function and expression profiles. Using these ‘omic’ approaches, pathogenicity‐ and defence‐related genes and proteins expressed during phytopathogen infections have been identified and enormous datasets have been accumulated. However, the understanding of molecular plant–pathogen interactions is still an intriguing area of investigation. Proteomics has dramatically evolved in the pursuit of large‐scale functional assignment of candidate proteins and, by using this approach, several proteins expressed during phytopathogenic interactions have been identified. In this review, we highlight the proteins expressed during plant–virus, plant–bacterium, plant–fungus and plant–nematode interactions reported in proteomic studies, and discuss these findings considering the advantages and limitations of current proteomic tools.
Background: Rice (Oryza sativa L.) germplasm represents an extraordinary source of genes that control traits of agronomic importance such as drought tolerance. This diversity is the basis for the development of new cultivars better adapted to water restriction conditions, in particular for upland rice, which is grown under rainfall. The analyses of subtractive cDNA libraries and differential protein expression of drought tolerant and susceptible genotypes can contribute to the understanding of the genetic control of water use efficiency in rice. Results: Two subtractive libraries were constructed using cDNA of drought susceptible and tolerant genotypes submitted to stress against cDNA of well-watered plants. In silico analysis revealed 463 reads, which were grouped into 282 clusters. Several genes expressed exclusively in the tolerant or susceptible genotypes were identified. Additionally, proteome analysis of roots from stressed plants was performed and 22 proteins putatively associated to drought tolerance were identified by mass spectrometry. Conclusion: Several genes and proteins involved in drought-response, as well as genes with no described homologs were identified. Genes exclusively expressed in the tolerant genotype were, in general, related to maintenance of turgor and cell integrity. In contrast, in the susceptible genotype, expression of genes involved in protection against cell damage was not detected. Several protein families identified in the proteomic analysis were not detected in the cDNA analysis. There is an indication that the mechanisms of susceptibility to drought in upland rice are similar to those of lowland varieties.
The phylogenetic relationships of Xylella fastidiosa strains isolated from different hosts, including citrus trees, coffee, grapevine, plum and pear, were inferred by sequence analysis of the 16S rDNA and 16S-23S intergenic spacer region. A high level of similarity (97.1-100%) was found in the 16S rDNA of the Xylella fastidiosa strains. The 16S-23S region showed a higher level of variation, with similarity values ranging from 79.8 to 100%. Two tRNAs (tRNA(Ala) and tRNA(Ile)) were encountered within the spacer sequence. The phylogenetic trees, constructed using the neighbour-joining method, showed that the citrus, coffee, peach and plum strains were closely related and separate from grapevine strains. The pear strain remained isolated from all the other Xylella strains in both analyses and produced values of less than 20% in DNA-DNA hybridization experiments with a citrus strain. These results show that this strain does not belong to the Xylella fastidiosa genomic species.