SUMMARY: It is becoming increasingly evident that a plant–pathogen interaction may be compared to an open warfare, whose major weapons are proteins synthesized by both organisms. These weapons were gradually developed in what must have been a multimillion‐year evolutionary game of ping‐pong. The outcome of each battle results in the establishment of resistance or pathogenesis. The plethora of resistance mechanisms exhibited by plants may be grouped into constitutive and inducible, and range from morphological to structural and chemical defences. Most of these mechanisms are defensive, exhibiting a passive role, but some are highly active against pathogens, using as major targets the fungal cell wall, the plasma membrane or intracellular targets. A considerable overlap exists between pathogenesis‐related (PR) proteins and antifungal proteins. However, many of the now considered 17 families of PR proteins do not present any known role as antipathogen activity, whereas among the 13 classes of antifungal proteins, most are not PR proteins. Discovery of novel antifungal proteins and peptides continues at a rapid pace. In their long coevolution with plants, phytopathogens have evolved ways to avoid or circumvent the plant defence weaponry. These include protection of fungal structures from plant defence reactions, inhibition of elicitor‐induced plant defence responses and suppression of plant defences. A detailed understanding of the molecular events that take place during a plant–pathogen interaction is an essential goal for disease control in the future.

Little information is available concerning the expression of pathogenesis-related (PR) proteins in grapevine (Vitis vinifera) and their effect properties on the major fungal pathogens of grape. A systematic study was performed on the effect of total or individual grape proteins on mycelial growth, spore germination, and germ tube growth of Uncinula necator, Phomopsis viticola, and Botrytis cinerea. Two proteins, identified as PR proteins by immunological methods and by N-terminal sequencing as osmotin and thaumatin-like protein, exhibited strong antifungal activities in vitro, blocking the growth of Phomopsis viticola and Botrytis cinerea mycelia. In addition, they inhibited spore germination and germ tube growth of U. necator, Phomopsis viticola, and Botrytis cinerea. The presence of both proteins displayed a synergistic effect. The expression of osmotin and thaumatin-like protein was induced in grapevine leaves and berries infected with U. necator and Phomopsis viticola. Thaumatin previously was thought to occur exclusively in berries. Immunoblot analyses revealed the accumulation of the two PR proteins in infected leaves and berries, supporting a role in vivo in increasing the resistance of grapevine to fungal attack.

The attempted infection of a plant by a pathogen, such as a fungus or an Oomycete, may be regarded as a battle whose major weapons are proteins and smaller chemical compounds produced by both organisms. Indeed, plants produce an astonishing plethora of defense compounds that are still being discovered at a rapid pace. This pattern arose from a multi-million year, ping-pong−type co-evolution, in which plant and pathogen successively added new chemical weapons in this perpetual battle. As each defensive innovation was established in the host, new ways to circumvent it evolved in the pathogen. This complex co-evolution process probably explains not only the exquisite specificity observed between many pathogens and their hosts, but also the ineffectiveness or redundancy of some defensive genes which often encode enzymes with overlapping activities. Plants evolved a complex, multi-level series of structural and chemical barriers that are both constitutive or preformed and inducible. These defenses may involve strengthening of the cell wall, hypersensitive response (HR), oxidative burst, phytoalexins and pathogenesis-related (PR) proteins. The pathogen must successfully overcome these obstacles before it succeeds in causing disease. In some cases, it needs to modulate or modify plant cell metabolism to its own benefit and/or to abolish defense reactions. Central to the activation of plant responses is timely perception of the pathogen by the plant. A crucial role is played by elicitors which, depending on their mode of action, are broadly classified into nonspecific elicitors and highly specific elicitors or virulence effector/avirulence factors. A protein battle for penetration is then initiated, marking the pathogen attempted transition from extracellular to invasive growth before parasitism and disease can be established. Three major types of defense responses may be observed in plants: non-host resistance, host resistance, and host pathogenesis. Plant innate immunity may comprise a continuum from non-host resistance involving the detection of general elicitors to host-specific resistance involving detection of specific elicitors by R proteins. It was generally assumed that non-host resistance was based on passive mechanisms and that nonspecific rejection usually arose as a consequence of the non-host pathogen failure to breach the first lines of plant defense. However, recent evidence has blurred the clear-cut distinction among non-host resistance, host-specific resistance and disease. The same obstacles are also serious challenges for host pathogens, reducing their success rate significantly in causing disease. Indeed, even susceptible plants mount a (insufficient) defense response upon recognition of pathogen elicited molecular signals. Recent evidence suggests the occurrence of significant overlaps between the protein components and signalling pathways of these types of resistance, suggesting the existence of both shared and unique features for the three branches of plant innate immunity.

Grapevine is one of the most cultivated fruit crop worldwide with Vitis vinifera being the species with the highest economical importance. Being highly susceptible to fungal pathogens and increasingly affected by environmental factors, it has become an important agricultural research area, where gene expression analysis plays a fundamental role. Quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) is currently amongst the most powerful techniques to perform gene expression studies. Nevertheless, accurate gene expression quantification strongly relies on appropriate reference gene selection for sample normalization. Concerning V. vinifera, limited information still exists as for which genes are the most suitable to be used as reference under particular experimental conditions. In this work, seven candidate genes were investigated for their stability in grapevine samples referring to four distinct stresses (Erysiphe necator, wounding and UV-C irradiation in leaves and Phaeomoniella chlamydospora colonization in wood). The expression stability was evaluated using geNorm, NormFinder and BestKeeper. In all cases, full agreement was not observed for the three methods. To provide comprehensive rankings integrating the three different programs, for each treatment, a consensus ranking was created using a non-weighted unsupervised rank aggregation method. According to the last, the three most suitable reference genes to be used in grapevine leaves, regardless of the stress, are UBC, VAG and PEP. For the P. chlamydospora treatment, EF1, CYP and UBC were the best scoring genes. Acquaintance of the most suitable reference genes to be used in grapevine samples can contribute for accurate gene expression quantification in forthcoming studies.