Search
Submit Manuscript
Advanced Search
MAP  >  Technology in Horticulture
2023 Volume 3
Article Contents
Abstract
Introduction
Methods
Bioinformatics analysis of the ARF18 gene
Plant materials and cultivation methods
Plasmid construction and plant transformation
Extracting plant genomic DNA and RNA
Real-Time quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR)
GUS staining
Determination of nitrate content, nitrate reductase activity
Yeast one-hybrid (Y1H) assay
Dual luciferase assays
Protein degradation assays in vitro
Data analysis
Results
Auxin regulates nitrogen uptake and utilization in apple
Transcript levels of MdARFs are induced by nitrate
Phylogenetic relationships and multiple sequence alignment of MdARF18
Overexpression of MdARF18 affects root development
Overexpression of MdARF18 inhibits nitrate uptake in plants
MdARF18 targets genes related to nitrogen uptake and utilization
MdARF18 binds to the promoter of MdNRT1.1 to restrain its expression
Discussion
Conclusions
Author contributions
Data availability
Acknowledgments
Conflict of interest
Rights and permissions
References
About this article
Next Previous
ARTICLE   Open Access    

Toxicity of fusaric acid and beauvericin in tissue-cultured banana 'Grand Nain' and 'Lakatan'

  • 1.

    Institute of Plant Breeding, College of Agriculture and Food Science, University of the Philippines, Los Baños, Laguna, Philippines 4031

  • 2.

    Department of Biological Sciences and Environmental Studies, College of Science and Mathematics, University of the Philippines Mindanao, Philippines 8022

  • 3.

    Department of Biology, College of Science, De La Salle University, Manila, Philippines 1004

More Information
  • Fusarium oxysporum forma specialis cubense (Foc) produces toxins known to contribute to virulence and infection in the host. Fusaric acid (FA) and beauvericin (BEA) are major toxins contributing to Foc virulence in the host plant. Recent advancements allow the production of disease-resistant crops via cell selection, a process that involves resistance screening of somaclones using phytotoxin exposure. Determination of the appropriate concentration is an important step for the toxin-based selection of disease-resistant plants. In this study, the toxicity of FA (0, 5, 10, 20, 30, 50, and 100 μm) and BEA (0, 5, 10, and 20 μm) in different tissues of banana cv. ‘Grand Nain’ and 'Lakatan' were investigated. Overall results indicated a positive relationship between the toxin concentration and plant sensitivity, as indicated by the degree of vascular browning rate. Results demonstrated that lower concentrations of BEA are required for phytotoxicity than in FA. Furthermore, a higher degree of vascular browning was recorded in the test tissues of ‘Lakatan’ treated with FA and BEA than in the ‘Grand Nain’ genotype suggesting genotype-dependent sensitivity of banana to phytotoxins. To our knowledge, this study is the first to investigate the phytotoxicity of FA and BEA in callus cultures of banana ‘Lakatan.’

  • Introduction

    Crops require a variety of nutrients for growth and nitrogen is particularly important. Nitrogen is the primary factor limiting plant growth and yield formation, and it also plays a significant role in improving product quality[1−4]. Nitrogen accounts for 1%−3% of the dry weight of plants and is a component of many compounds. For example, it is an important part of proteins, a component of nucleic acids, the skeleton of cell membranes, and a constituent of chlorophyll[5,6]. When the plant is deficient in nitrogen, the synthesis process of nitrogen-containing substances such as proteins decrease significantly, cell division and elongation are restricted, and chlorophyll content decreases, and this leads to short and thin plants, small leaves, and pale color[2,7,8]. If nitrogen in the plant is in excess, a large number of carbohydrates will be used for the synthesis of proteins, chlorophyll, and other substances, so that cells are large and thin-walled, and easy to be attacked by pests and diseases. At the same time, the mechanical tissues in the stem are not well developed and are prone to collapse[3,8,9]. Therefore, the development of new crop varieties with both high yields and improved nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) is an urgently needed goal for more sustainable agriculture with minimal nitrogen demand.

    Plants obtain inorganic nitrogen from the soil, mainly in the form of NH4+ and nitrate (NO3−)[10−13]. Nitrate uptake by plants occurs primarily in aerobic environments[3]. Transmembrane proteins are required for nitrate uptake from the external environment as well as for transport and translocation between cells, tissues, and organs. NITRATE TRANSPORTER PROTEIN 1 (NRT1)/PEPTIDE TRANSPORTER (PTR) family (NPF), NRT2, CHLORIDE CHANNEL (CLC) family, and SLOW ACTIVATING ANION CHANNEL are four protein families involved in nitrate transport[14]. One of the most studied of these is NRT1.1, which has multiple functions[14]. NRT1.1 is a major nitrate sensor, regulating many aspects of nitrate physiology and developmental responses, including regulating the expression levels of nitrate-related genes, modulating root architecture, and alleviating seed dormancy[15−18].

    There is mounting evidence that plant growth and development are influenced by interactions across numerous phytohormone signaling pathways, including abscisic acid, gibberellins, growth hormones, and cytokinins[3,19,20]. To increase the effectiveness of plant nitrogen fertilizer application, it may be possible to tweak the signaling mediators or vary the content of certain phytohormones. Since the 1930s, research on the interplay between growth factors and N metabolism has also been conducted[3]. The Indole acetic acid (IAA) level of plant shoots is shown to decrease in early studies due to N shortage, although roots exhibit the reverse tendency[3,21]. In particular, low NO3− levels caused IAA buildup in the roots of Arabidopsis, Glycine max, Triticum aestivum, and Zea mays, indicating that IAA is crucial for conveying the effectiveness of exogenous nitrogen to the root growth response[20,22,23].

    Studies have shown that two families are required to control the expression of auxin-responsive genes: one is the Auxin Response Factor (ARF) and the other is the Aux/IAA repressor family[24−26]. As the transcription factor, the ARF protein regulates the expression of auxin response genes by specifically binding to the TGTCNN auxin response element (AuxRE) in promoters of primary or early auxin response genes[27]. Among them, rice OsARF18, as a class of transcriptional repressor, has been involved in the field of nitrogen utilization and yield[23,28]. In rice (Oryza sativa), mutations in rice salt tolerant 1 (rst1), encoding the OsARF18 gene, lead to the loss of its transcriptional repressor activity and up-regulation of OsAS1 expression, which accelerates the assimilation of NH4+ to Asn and thus increases N utilization[28]. In addition, dao mutant plants deterred the conversion of IAA to OxIAA, thus high levels of IAA strongly activates OsARF18, which subsequently represses the expression of OsARF2 and OsSUT1 by directly binding to the AuxRE and SuRE promoter motifs, resulting in the inhibition of carbohydrate partitioning[23]. As a result, rice carrying the dao has low yields.

    Apples (Malus domestica) are used as a commercially important crop because of their high ecological adaptability, high nutritional value, and annual availability of fruit[29]. To ensure high apple yields, growers promote rapid early fruit yield growth by applying nitrogen. However, the over-application of nitrogen fertilizer to apples during cultivation also produces common diseases and the over-application of nitrogen fertilizer is not only a waste of resources but also harmful to the environment[29]. Therefore, it is of great significance to explore efficient nitrogen-regulated genes to understand the uptake and regulation of nitrogen fertilizer in apples, and to provide reasonable guidance for nitrogen application during apple production[30]. In this study, MdARF18 is identified which is a key transcription factor involved in nitrate uptake and transport in apples and MdARF18 reduces NO3− uptake and assimilation. Further analysis suggests that MdRF18 may inhibit the transcriptional level of MdNRT1.1 promoter by directly binding to its TGTCTT target, thus affecting normal plant growth.

    Methods

    Bioinformatics analysis of the ARF18 gene

    The protein sequence of apple MdARF18 (MD07G1152100) was obtained from The Apple Genome (https://iris.angers.inra.fr/gddh13/). Mutant of arf18 (GABI_699B09) sequence numbers were obtained from the official TAIR website (www.arabidopsis.org). The protein sequences of ARF18 from different species were obtained from the protein sequence of apple MdARF18 on the NCBI website. Using these data, a phylogenetic tree with reasonably close associations was constructed[31].

    Protein structural domain prediction of ARF18 was performed on the SMART website (https://smart.embl.de/). Motif analysis of ARF18 was performed by MEME (https://meme-suite.org/meme/tools/meme). Clustal was used to do multiple sequence comparisons. The first step was accessing the EBI web server through the Clustal Omega channel. The visualization of the results was altered using Jalview, which may be downloaded from www.jalview.org/download.[32]

    Plant materials and cultivation methods

    The apple 'Orin' callus was transplanted on MS medium containing 1.5 mg·L−1 6-benzylaminopurine (6-BA) and 0.5 mg·L−1 2,4 dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) at 25 °C, in the dark, at 21-d intervals. 'Royal Gala' apple cultivars were cultured in vermiculite and transplanted at 25 °C every 30 d. The Arabidopsis plants used were of the Columbia (Col-0) wild-type variety. Sowing and germinating Arabidopsis seeds on MS nutrient medium, and Arabidopsis seeds were incubated and grown at 25 °C (light/dark cycle of 16 h/8 h)[33].

    The nutrient solution in the base contained 1.0 mM CaCl2, 1.0 mM KH2PO4, 1.0 mM MgSO4, 0.1 mM FeSO4·7H2O 0.1 mM Na2EDTA·2H2O, 50 μM MnSO4·H2O, 50 μM H3BO3, 0.05 μM CuSO4·5H2O, 0.5 μM Na2MoO4·2H2O, 15 μM ZnSO4·7H2O, 2.5 μM KI, and 0.05 μM CoCl·6H2O, and 0.05 μM CoCl·6H2O, and 0.05 μM CoCl· 6H2O. 2H2O, 15 μM ZnSO4·7H2O, 2.5 μM KI and 0.05 μM CoCl·6H2O, and 0.05 μM CoCl·6H2O, supplemented with 0.5 mM, 2 mM, and 10 mM KNO3 as the sole nitrogen source, and added with the relevant concentrations of KCl to maintain the same K concentration[33,34].

    For auxin treatment, 12 uniformly growing apple tissue-cultured seedlings (Malus domestica 'Royal Gala') were selected from each of the control and treatment groups, apple seedlings were incubated in a nutrient solution containing 1.5 mg·L−1 6-BA, 0.2 mg·L−1 naphthalene acetic acid, and IAA (10 μM) for 50 d, and then the physiological data were determined. Apple seedlings were incubated and grown at 25 °C (light/dark cycle of 16 h/8 h).

    For nitrate treatment, Arabidopsis seedlings were transferred into an MS medium (containing different concentrations of KNO3) as soon as they germinated to test root development. Seven-day-old Arabidopsis were transplanted into vermiculite and then treated with a nutrient solution containing different concentrations of KNO3 (0.5, 2, 10 mM) and watered at 10-d intervals. Apple calli were treated with medium containing 1.5 mg·L−1 6-BA, 0.5 mg·L−1 2,4-D, and varying doses of KNO3 (0.5, 2, and 10 mM) for 25 d, and samples were examined for relevant physiological data. Apple calli were subjected to the same treatment for 1 d for GUS staining[35].

    Plasmid construction and plant transformation

    To obtain MdARF18 overexpression materials, the open reading frame (ORF) of MdARF18 was introduced into the pRI-101 vector. To obtain pMdNRT1.1 material, the 2 kb segment located before the transcription start site of MdNRT1.1 was inserted into the pCAMBIA1300 vector. The Agrobacterium tumefaciens LBA4404 strain was cultivated in lysozyme broth (LB) medium supplemented with 50 mg·L−1 kanamycin and 50 mg·L−1 rifampicin. The MdARF18 overexpression vector and the ProMdNRT1.1::GUS vector were introduced into Arabidopsis and apple callus using the flower dip transformation procedure. The third-generation homozygous transgenic Arabidopsis (T3) and transgenic calli were obtained[36]. Information on the relevant primers designed is shown in Supplemental Table S1.

    Extracting plant genomic DNA and RNA

    Plant DNA and RNA were obtained using the Genomic DNA Kit and the Omni Plant RNA Kit (tDNase I) (Tiangen, Beijing, China)[37].

    Real-Time quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR)

    cDNA was synthesized for qPCR by using the PrimeScript First Strand cDNA Synthesis Kit (Takara, Dalian, China). The cDNA for qPCR was synthesized by using the PrimeScript First Strand cDNA Synthesis Kit (Takara, Dalian, China). Quantitative real-time fluorescence analysis was performed by using the UltraSYBR Mixture (Low Rox) kit (ComWin Biotech Co. Ltd., Beijing, China). qRT-PCR experiments were performed using the 2−ΔΔCᴛ method for data analysis. The data were analyzed by the 2−ΔΔCᴛ method[31].

    GUS staining

    GUS staining buffer contained 1 mM 5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl-β-glutamic acid, 0.01 mM EDTA, 0.5 mM hydrogen ferrocyanide, 100 mM sodium phosphate (pH 7.0), and 0.1% (v/v) Triton X-100 was maintained at 37 °C in the dark. The pMdNRT1.1::GUS construct was transiently introduced into apple calli. To confirm whether MdNRT1.1 is activated or inhibited by MdARF18, we co-transformed 35S::MdARF18 into pMdNRT1.1::GUS is calling. The activity of transgenic calli was assessed using GUS labeling and activity assays[33,38].

    Determination of nitrate content, nitrate reductase activity

    The specimens were crushed into fine particles, combined with 1 mL of ddH2O, and thereafter subjected to a temperature of 100 °C for 30 min. The supernatant was collected in a flow cell after centrifugation at 12,000 revolutions per minute for 10 min. The AutoAnalyzer 3 continuous flow analyzer was utilized to measure nitrate concentrations. (SEAL analytical, Mequon, WI, USA). Nitrate reductase (NR) activity was characterized by the corresponding kits (Solarbio Life Science, Beijing, China) using a spectrophotometric method[31].

    Yeast one-hybrid (Y1H) assay

    Y1H assays were performed as previously described by Liu et al.[39]. The coding sequence of MdARF18 was integrated into the pGADT7 expression vector, whereas the promoter region of MdNRT1.1 was included in the pHIS2 reporter vector. Subsequently, the constitutive vectors were co-transformed into the yeast monohybrid strain Y187. The individual transformants were assessed on a medium lacking tryptophan, leucine, and histidine (SDT/-L/-H). Subsequently, the positive yeast cells were identified using polymerase chain reaction (PCR). The yeast strain cells were diluted at dilution factors of 10, 100, 1,000, and 10,000. Ten μL of various doses were added to selective medium (SD-T/-L/-H) containing 120 mM 3-aminotriazole (3-AT) and incubated at 28 °C for 2−3 d[37].

    Dual luciferase assays

    Dual-luciferase assays were performed as described previously[40]. Full-length MdARF18 was cloned into pGreenII 62-SK to produce MdARF18-62-SK. The promoter fragment of MdNRT1.1 was cloned into pGreenII 0800-LUC to produce pMdNRT1.1-LUC. Different combinations were transformed into Agrobacterium tumefaciens LBA4404 and the Agrobacterium solution was injected onto the underside of the leaves of tobacco (Nicotiana benthamiana) leaves abaxially. The Dual Luciferase Reporter Kit (Promega, www.promega.com) was used to detect fluorescence activity.

    Protein degradation assays in vitro

    Total protein was extracted from wild-type and transgenic apple calli with or without 100 μM MG132 treatment. The purified MdARF18-HIS fusion protein was incubated with total protein[41]. Samples were collected at the indicated times (0, 1, 3, 5, and 7 h).

    Protein gel blots were analyzed using GST antibody. ACTIN antibody was used as an internal reference. All antibodies used in this study were provided by Abmart (www.ab-mart.com).

    Data analysis

    Unless otherwise noted, every experiment was carried out independently in triplicate. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to establish the statistical significance of all data, and Duncan's test was used to compare results at the p < 0.05 level[31].

    Results

    Auxin regulates nitrogen uptake and utilization in apple

    To investigate whether auxin affects the effective uptake of nitrate in apple, we first externally applied IAA under normal N (5 mM NO3−) environment, and this result showed that the growth of Gala apple seedlings in the IAA-treated group were better than the control, and their fresh weights were heavier than the control group (Fig. 1a, d). The N-related physiological indexes of apple seedlings also showed that the nitrate content and NR activity of the root part of the IAA-treated group were significantly higher than the control group, while the nitrate content and NR activity of the shoot part were lower than the control group (Fig. 1b, c). These results demonstrate that auxin could promote the uptake of nitrate and thus promotes growth of plants.

    Figure 1.  Auxin enhances nitrate uptake of Gala seedlings. (a) Phenotypes of apple (Malus domestica 'Royal Gala') seedlings grown nutritionally for 50 d under IAA (10 μM) treatment. (b) Nitrate content of shoot and root apple (Malus domestica 'Royal Gala') seedlings treated with IAA. (c) NR activity in shoot and root of IAA treatment apple (Malus domestica 'Royal Gala') seedlings. (d) Seedling fresh weight under IAA treatment. Bars represent the mean ± SD (n = 3). Different letters above the bars indicate significant differences using the LSD test (p < 0.05).
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    To test whether auxin affects the expression of genes related to nitrogen uptake and metabolism. For the root, the expression levels of MdNRT1.1, MdNRT2.1, MdNIA1, MdNIA2, and MdNIR were higher than control group (Supplemental Fig. S1a, f, h−j), while the expression levels of MdNRT1.2, MdNRT1.6 and MdNRT2.5 were lower than control group significantly (Supplemental Fig. S1b, d, g). For the shoot, the expression of MdNRT1.1, MdNRT1.5, MdNRT1.6, MdNRT1.7, MdNRT2.1, MdNRT2.5, MdNIA1, MdNIA2, and MdNIR genes were significantly down-regulated (Supplemental Fig. S1a, c−j). This result infers that the application of auxin could mediate nitrate uptake in plants by affecting the expression levels of relevant nitrate uptake and assimilation genes.

    Transcript levels of MdARFs are induced by nitrate

    Since the auxin signaling pathway requires the regulation of the auxin response factors (ARFs)[25,27], it was investigated whether members of ARF genes were nitrate responsive. Firstly, qPCR quantitative analysis showed that the five subfamily genes of MdARFs (MdARF9, MdARF2, MdARF12, MdARF3, and MdARF18) were expressed at different levels in various organs of the plant (Supplemental Fig. S2). Afterward, the expression levels of five ARF genes were analyzed under different concentrations of nitrate treatment (Fig. 2), and it was concluded that these genes represented by each subfamily responded in different degrees, but the expression level of MdARF18 was up-regulated regardless of low or high nitrogen (Fig. 2i, j), and the expression level of MdARF18 showed a trend of stable up-regulation under IAA treatment (Supplemental Fig. S3). The result demonstrates that MdARFs could affect the uptake of external nitrate by plants and MdARF18 may play an important role in the regulation of nitrate uptake.

    Figure 2.  Relative expression analysis of MdARFs subfamilies in response to different concentrations of nitrate. Expression analysis of representative genes from five subfamilies of MdARF transcription factors. Bars represent the mean ± SD (n = 3). Different letters above the bars indicate significant differences using the LSD test (p < 0.05).
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    Phylogenetic relationships and multiple sequence alignment of MdARF18

    MdARF18 (MD07G1152100) was predicted through The Apple Genome website (https://iris.angers.inra.fr/gddh13/) and it had high fitness with AtARF18 (AT3G61830). The homologs of ARF18 from 15 species were then identified in NCBI (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov) and then constructed an evolutionary tree (Supplemental Fig. S4). The data indicates that MdARF18 was most closely genetically related to MbARF18 (Malus baccata), indicating that they diverged recently in evolution (Supplemental Fig. S4). Conserved structural domain analyses indicated that all 15 ARF18 proteins had highly similar conserved structural domains (Supplemental Fig. S5). In addition, multiple sequence alignment analysis showed that all 15 ARF18 genes have B3-type DNA-binding domains (Supplemental Fig. S6), which is in accordance with the previous reports on ARF18 protein structure[26].

    Overexpression of MdARF18 affects root development

    To explore whether MdARF18 could affect the development of the plant's root system. Firstly, MdARF18 was heterologously expressed into Arabidopsis, and an arf18 mutant (GABI_699B09) Arabidopsis was also obtained (Supplemental Fig. S7). Seven-day-old MdARF18 transgenic Arabidopsis and arf18 mutants were treated in a medium with different nitrate concentrations for 10 d (Fig. 3a, b). After observing results, it was found that under the environment of high nitrate concentration, the primary root of MdARF18 was shorter than arf18 and wild type (Fig. 3c), and the primary root length of arf18 is the longest (Fig. 3c), while there was no significant difference in the lateral root (Fig. 3d). For low nitrate concentration, there was no significant difference in the length of the primary root, and the number of lateral roots of MdARF18 was slightly more than wild type and arf18 mutant. These results suggest that MdARF18 affects root development in plants. However, in general, low nitrate concentrations could promote the transport of IAA by NRT1.1 and thus inhibit lateral root production[3], so it might be hypothesized that MdARF18 would have some effect on MdNRT1.1 thus leading to the disruption of lateral root development.

    Figure 3.  MdARF18 inhibits root development. (a) MdARF18 inhibits root length at 10 mM nitrate concentration. (b) MdARF18 promotes lateral root growth at 0.5 mM nitrate concentration. (c) Primary root length statistics. (d) Lateral root number statistics. Bars represent the mean ± SD (n = 3). Different letters above the bars indicate significant differences using the LSD test (p < 0.05).
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    Overexpression of MdARF18 inhibits nitrate uptake in plants

    To investigate whether MdARF18 affects the growth of individual plants under different concentrations of nitrate, 7-day-old overexpression MdARF18, and arf18 mutants were planted in the soil and incubated for 20 d. It was found that arf18 had the best growth of shoot, while MdARF18 had the weakest shoot growth at any nitrate concentration (Fig. 4a). MdARF18 had the lightest fresh weight and the arf18 mutant had the heaviest fresh weight (Fig. 4b). N-related physiological indexes revealed that the nitrate content and NR activity of arf18 were significantly higher than wild type, whereas MdARF18 materials were lower than wild type (Fig. 4c, d). More detail, MdARF18 had the lightest fresh weight under low and normal nitrate, while the arf18 mutant had the heaviest fresh weight, and the fresh weight of arf18 under high nitrate concentration did not differ much from the wild type (Fig. 4b). Nitrogen-related physiological indexes showed that the nitrate content of arf18 was significantly higher than wild type, while MdARF18 was lower than wild type. The NR activity of arf18 under high nitrate did not differ much from the wild type, but the NR activity of MdARF18 was the lowest in any treatment (Fig. 4c, d). These results indicate that MdARF18 significantly inhibits plant growth by inhibiting plants to absorb nitrate, and is particularly pronounced at high nitrate concentrations.

    Figure 4.  Ectopic expression of MdARF18 inhibits Arabidopsis growth. (a) Status of Arabidopsis growth after one month of incubation at different nitrate concentrations. (b) Fresh weight of Arabidopsis. (c) Nitrate content of Arabidopsis. (d) NR activity in Arabidopsis. Bars represent the mean ± SD (n = 3). Different letters above the bars indicate significant differences using the LSD test (p < 0.05).
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    In addition, to further validate this conclusion, MdARF18 overexpression calli were obtained and treated with different concentrations of nitrate (Supplemental Fig. S8). The results show that the growth of overexpressed MdARF18 was weaker than wild type in both treatments (Supplemental Fig. S9a). The fresh weight of MdARF18 was significantly lighter than wild type (Supplemental Fig. S9b), and its nitrate and NR activity were lower than wild type (Supplemental Fig. S9c, d), which was consistent with the above results (Fig. 4). This result further confirms that MdARF18 could inhibit the development of individual plants by inhibiting the uptake of nitrate.

    MdARF18 targets genes related to nitrogen uptake and utilization

    Nitrate acts as a signaling molecule that takes up nitrate by activating the NRT family as well as NIAs and NIR[3,34]. To further investigate the pathway by which MdARF18 inhibits plant growth and reduces nitrate content, qRT-PCR was performed on the above plant materials treated with different concentrations of nitrate (Fig. 5). The result shows that the expression levels of AtNRT1.1, AtNIA1, AtNIA2, and AtNIR were all down-regulated in overexpression of MdARF18, and up-regulated in the arf18 mutant (Fig. 5a, h−j). There was no significant change in AtNRT1.2 at normal nitrate levels, but AtNRT1.2 expression levels were down-regulated in MdARF18 and up-regulated in arf18 at both high and low nitrate levels (Fig. 5b). This trend in the expression levels of these genes might be consistent with the fact that MdARF18 inhibits the expression of nitrogen-related genes and restricts plant growth. The trend in the expression levels of these genes is consistent with MdARF18 restricting plant growth by inhibiting the expression of nitrogen-related genes. However, AtNRT1.5, AtNRT1.6, AtNRT1.7, AtNRT2.1, and AtNRT2.5 did not show suppressed expression levels in MdARF18 (Fig. 5c−g). These results suggest that MdARF18 inhibits nitrate uptake and plant growth by repressing some of the genes for nitrate uptake or assimilation.

    Figure 5.  qPCR-RT analysis of N-related genes. Expression analysis of N-related genes in MdARF18 transgenic Arabidopsis at different nitrate concentrations. Bars represent the mean ± SD (n = 3). Different letters above the bars indicate significant differences using the LSD test (p < 0.05).
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    In addition, to test whether different concentrations of nitrate affect the protein stability of MdARF18. However, it was found that there was no significant difference in the protein stability of MdARF18 at different concentrations of nitrate (Supplemental Fig. S10). This result suggests that nitrate does not affect the degradation of MdARF18 protein.

    MdARF18 binds to the promoter of MdNRT1.1 to restrain its expression

    To further verify whether MdARF18 can directly bind N-related genes, firstly we found that the MdNRT1.1 promoter contains binding sites to ARF factors (Fig. 6a). The yeast one-hybrid research demonstrated an interaction between MdARF18 and the MdNRT1.1 promoter, as shown in Fig. 6b. Yeast cells that were simultaneously transformed with MdNRT1.1-P-pHIS and pGADT7 were unable to grow in selected SD medium. However, cells that were transformed with MdNRT1.1-P-pHIS and MdARF18-pGADT7 grew successfully in the selective medium. The result therefore hypothesizes that MdARF18 could bind specifically to MdNRT1.1 promoter to regulate nitrate uptake in plants.

    Figure 6.  MdARF18 binds directly to the promoter of MdNRT1.1. (a) Schematic representation of MdNRT1.1 promoter. (b) Y1H assay of MdARF18 bound to the MdNRT1.1 promoter in vitro. 10−1, 10−2, 10−3, and 10−4 indicate that the yeast concentration was diluted 10, 100, 1,000, and 10,000 times, respectively. 3-AT stands for 3-Amino-1,2,4-triazole. (c) Dual luciferase assays demonstrate the binding of MdARF18 with MdNRT1.1 promoter. The horizontal bar on the left side of the right indicates the captured signal intensity. Empty LUC and 35S vectors were used as controls. Representative images of three independent experiments are shown here.
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    To identify the inhibition or activation of MdNRT1.1 by MdARF18, we analyzed their connections by Dual luciferase assays (Fig. 6c), and also analyzed the fluorescence intensity (Supplemental Fig. S11). It was concluded that the fluorescence signals of cells carrying 35Spro and MdNRT1.1pro::LUC were stronger, but the mixture of 35Spro::MdARF18 and MdNRT1.1pro::LUC injected with fluorescence signal intensity was significantly weakened. Next, we transiently transformed the 35S::MdARF18 into pMdNRT1.1::GUS transgenic calli (Fig. 7). GUS results first showed that the color depth of pMdNRT1.1::GUS and 35S::MdARF18 were significantly lighter than pMdnNRT1.1::GUS alone (Fig. 7a). GUS enzyme activity, as well as GUS expression, also indicated that the calli containing pMdnNRT1.1::GUS alone had a stronger GUS activity (Fig. 7b, c). In addition, the GUS activity of calli containing both pMdNRT1.1:GUS and 35S::MdARF18 were further attenuated under both high and low nitrate concentrations (Fig. 7a). These results suggest that MdARF18 represses MdNRT1.1 expression by directly binding to the MdNRT1.1 promoter region.

    Figure 7.  MdARF18 inhibits the expression of MdNRT1.1. (a) GUS staining experiment of pMdNRT1.1::GUS transgenic calli and transgenic calli containing both pMdNRT1.1::GUS and 35S::MdARF18 with different nitrate treatments. (b) GUS activity assays in MdARF18 overexpressing calli with different nitrate treatments. (c) GUS expression level in MdARF18 overexpressing calli with different nitrate treatments. Bars represent the mean ± SD (n = 3). Different numbers of asterisk above the bars indicate significant differences using the LSD test (*p < 0.05 and **p< 0.01).
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    Discussion

    Plants replenish their nutrients by absorbing nitrates from the soil[42,43]. Previous studies have shown that some of the plant hormones such as IAA, GA, and ABA interact with nitrate[25,44−45]. The effect of nitrate on the content and transport of IAA has been reported in previous studies, e.g., nitrate supply reduced IAA content in Arabidopsis, wheat, and maize roots and inhibited the transport of IAA from shoot to root[20,21]. In this study, it was found that auxin treatment promoted individual fresh weight gain and growth (Fig. 1a, b). Nitrate content and NR activity were also significantly higher in their root parts (Fig. 1c, d) and also affected the transcript expression levels of related nitrate uptake and assimilation genes (Supplemental Fig. S1). Possibly because IAA can affect plant growth by influencing the uptake of external nitrates by the plant.

    ARFs are key transcription factors to regulate auxin signaling[46−49]. We identified five representative genes of the apple MdARFs subfamily and they all had different expression patterns (Supplemental Fig. S2). The transcript levels of each gene were found to be affected to different degrees under different concentrations of nitrate, but the expression level of MdARF18 was up-regulated under both low and high nitrate conditions (Fig. 2). The transcript level of MdARF18 was also activated under IAA treatment (Supplemental Fig. S3), so MdARF18 began to be used in the study of the mechanism of nitrate uptake in plants. In this study, an Arabidopsis AtARF18 homolog was successfully cloned and named MdARF18 (Supplemental Figs S4, S5). It contains a B3-type DNA-binding structural domain consistent with previous studies of ARFs (Supplemental Fig. S6), and arf18 mutants were also obtained and their transcript levels were examined (Supplemental Fig. S7).

    Plants rely on rapid modification of the root system to efficiently access effective nitrogen resources in the soil for growth and survival. The plasticity of root development is an effective strategy for accessing nitrate, and appropriate concentrations of IAA can promote the development of lateral roots[7,44]. The present study found that the length of the primary root was shortened and the number of lateral roots did increase in IAA-treated Gl3 apple seedlings (Supplemental Fig. S12). Generally, an environment with low concentrations of nitrate promotes the transport of IAA by AtNRT1.1, which inhibits the growth of lateral roots[14]. However, in the research of MdARF18 transgenic Arabidopsis, it was found that the lateral roots of MdARF18-OX increased under low concentrations of nitrate, but there was no significant change in the mutant arf18 (Fig. 3). Therefore, it was hypothesized that MdARF18 might repress the expression of the MdNRT1.1 gene or other related genes that can regulate root plasticity, thereby affecting nitrate uptake in plants.

    In rice, several researchers have demonstrated that OsARF18 significantly regulates nitrogen utilization. Loss of function of the Rice Salt Tolerant 1 (RST1) gene (encoding OsARF18) removes its ability to transcriptionally repress OsAS1, accelerating the assimilation of NH4+ to Asn and thereby increasing nitrogen utilization[28]. During soil incubation of MdARF18-OX Arabidopsis, it was found that leaving aside the effect of differences in nitrate concentration, the arf18 mutant grew significantly better than MdARF18-OX and had higher levels of nitrate and NR activity in arf18 than in MdARF18-OX. This demonstrates that MdARF18 may act as a repressor of nitrate uptake and assimilation, thereby inhibiting normal plant development (Fig. 4). Interestingly, an adequate nitrogen environment promotes plant growth, but MdARF18-OX Arabidopsis growth and all physiological indexes were poorer under high nitrate concentration than MdARF18-OX at other concentrations. We hypothesize that MdARF18 may be activated more intensively at high nitrate concentrations, or that MdARF18 suppresses the expression levels of genes for nitrate uptake or assimilation (genes that may play a stronger role at high nitrate concentrations), thereby inhibiting plant growth. In addition, we obtained MdARF18 transgenic calli (Supplemental Fig. S8) and subjected them to high and low concentrations of nitrate, and also found that MdARF18 inhibited the growth of individuals at both concentrations (Supplemental Fig. S9). This further confirms that MdARF18 inhibits nitrate uptake in individuals.

    ARF family transcription factors play a key role in transmitting auxin signals to alter plant growth and development, e.g. osarf1 and osarf24 mutants have reduced levels of OsNRT1.1B, OsNRT2.3a and OsNIA2 transcripts[22]. Therefore, further studies are needed to determine whether MdARF18 activates nitrate uptake through different molecular mechanisms. The result revealed that the transcript levels of AtNRT1.1, AtNIA1, AtNIA2, and AtNIR in MdARF18-OX were consistent with the developmental pattern of impaired plant growth (Fig. 5). Unfortunately, we attempted to explore whether variability in nitrate concentration affects MdARF18 to differ at the protein level, but the two did not appear to differ significantly (Supplemental Fig. S10).

    ARF transcription factors act as trans-activators/repressors of N metabolism-related genes by directly binding to TGTCNN/NNGACA-containing fragments in the promoter regions of downstream target genes[27,50]. The NRT family plays important roles in nitrate uptake, transport, and storage, and NRT1.1 is an important dual-affinity nitrate transporter protein[7,50−52], and nitrogen utilization is very important for apple growth[53,54]. We identified binding sites in the promoters of these N-related genes that are compatible with ARF factors, and MdARF18 was found to bind to MdNRT1.1 promoter by yeast one-hybrid technique (Fig. 6a, b). It was also verified by Dual luciferase assays that MdARF18 could act as a transcriptional repressor that inhibited the expression of the downstream gene MdNRT1.1 (Fig. 6c), which inhibited the uptake of nitrate in plants. In addition, the GUS assay was synchronized to verify that transiently expressed pMdNRT1.1::GUS calli with 35S::MdARF18 showed a lighter staining depth and a significant decrease in GUS transcript level and enzyme activity (Fig. 7). This phenomenon was particularly pronounced at high concentrations of nitrate. These results suggest that MdARF18 may directly bind to the MdNRT1.1 promoter and inhibit its expression, thereby suppressing NO3− metabolism and decreasing the efficiency of nitrate uptake more significantly under high nitrate concentrations.

    Conclusions

    In conclusion, in this study, we found that MdARF18 responds to nitrate and could directly bind to the TGTCTT site of the MdNRT1.1 promoter to repress its expression. Our findings provide new insights into the molecular mechanisms by which MdARF18 regulates nitrate transport in apple.

    Author contributions

    The authors confirm contribution to the paper as follows: study conception and design: Liu GD; data collection: Liu GD, Rui L, Liu RX; analysis and interpretation of results: Liu GD, Li HL, An XH; draft manuscript preparation: Liu GD; supervision: Zhang S, Zhang ZL; funding acquisition: You CX, Wang XF; All authors reviewed the results and approved the final version of the manuscript.

    Data availability

    Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

    Acknowledgments

    This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (32272683), the Shandong Province Key R&D Program of China (2022TZXD008-02), the China Agriculture Research System of MOF and MARA (CARS-27), the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2022YFD1201700), and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) (32172538).

  • The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

  • [1]

    Beckman CH, Mace ME, Halmos S, McGahan MW. 1961. Physical barriers associated with resistance in Fusarium wilt of bananas. Phytopathology 51:507−15

    Google Scholar

    [2]

    Li C, Zuo C, Deng G, Kuang R, Yang Q, et al. 2013. Contamination of bananas with beauvericin and fusaric acid produced by Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense. PLoS ONE 8:e70226

    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0070226

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [3]

    Fakhouri W, Walker F, Armbruster W, Buchenauer H. 2003. Detoxification of fusaric acid by a nonpathogenic Colletotrichum sp. Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology 63:263−69

    doi: 10.1016/j.pmpp.2004.03.004

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [4]

    Ding Z, Yang L, Wang G, Guo L, Liu L, et al. 2018. Fusaric acid is a virulence factor of Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense on banana plantlets. Tropical Plant Pathology 43:297−305

    doi: 10.1007/s40858-018-0230-4

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [5]

    Liu S, Li J, Zhang Y, Liu N, Viljoen A, et al. 2019. Fusaric acid instigates the invasion of banana by Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense TR4. New Phytologist 225:913−929

    doi: 10.1111/nph.16193

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [6]

    Drysdale RB. 1984. The production and significance in phytopathology of toxins produced by species of Fusarium. In The Applied mycology of Fusarium, eds. Moss MO, Smith JE. x, 264 pp. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 95–105
    [7]

    Marrè MT, Vergani P, Albergoni FG. 1993. Relationship between fusaric acid uptake and its binding to cell structures by leaves of Egeria densa and its toxic effects on membrane permeability and respiration. Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology 42:141−57

    doi: 10.1006/pmpp.1993.1012

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [8]

    Chakrabarti DK, Ghosal S. 1989. The disease cycle of mango malformation induced by Fusarium moniliforme var. subglutinans and the curative effects of mangiferin-metal chelates. Journal of Phytopathology 125:238−46

    doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0434.1989.tb01065.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [9]

    Gapillout I, Milat ML, Blein JP. 1995. Effect of fusaric acid on cells from tomato cultivars resistant or susceptible to Fusarium oxysporum f. sp.Lycopersici. European Journal of Plant Pathology 102:127−32

    doi: 10.1007/BF01877099

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [10]

    D'Alton A, Etherton B. 1984. Effects of fusaric acid on tomato root hair membrane potentials and ATP Levels 1. Plant Physiology 74:39−42

    doi: 10.1104/pp.74.1.39

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [11]

    Kuźniak E. 2001. Effect of fusaric acid on reactive oxygen species and antioxidants in tomato cell cultures. Journal of Phytopathology 149:575−82

    doi: 10.1046/j.1439-0434.2001.00682.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [12]

    Brown DW, Lee SH, Kim LH, Ryu JG, Lee S, et al. 2015. Identification of a 12-gene fusaric acid biosynthetic gene cluster in Fusarium species through comparative and functional genomics. Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions 28:319−32

    doi: 10.1094/MPMI-09-14-0264-R

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [13]

    López-Díaz C, Rahjoo V, Sulyok M, Ghionna V, Martín-Vicente A, et al. 2018. Fusaric acid contributes to virulence of Fusarium oxysporum on plant and mammalian hosts. Molecular Plant Pathology 19:440−53

    doi: 10.1111/mpp.12536

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [14]

    Moretti A, Logrieco A, Bottalico A, Ritieni A, Randazzo G, et al. 1995. Beauvericin production by Fusarium subglutinans from different geographical areas. Mycological Research 99:282−86

    doi: 10.1016/S0953-7562(09)80899-X

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [15]

    Hamill RL, Higgens CE, Boaz HE, Gorman M. 1969. The structure of beauvericin, a new depsipeptide antibiotic toxic to Artemia salina. Tetrahedron Letters 49:4255−58

    doi: 10.1016/s0040-4039(01)88668-8

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [16]

    Hidaka H, Nagatsu T, Takeya K, Takeuchi T, Suda H. 1969. Fusaric acid, a hypertensive agent produced by fungi. The Journal of Antibiotics 22:228−30

    doi: 10.7164/antibiotics.22.228

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [17]

    Lemmens-Gruber R, Rachoy B, Steininger E, Kouri K, Saleh P, et al. 2000. The effect of the Fusarium metabolite beauvericin on electromechanical and physiological properties in isolated smooth and heart muscle preparations of guinea pigs. Mycopathologia 149:5−12

    doi: 10.1023/A:1007293812007

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [18]

    Logrieco A, Moretti A, Ritieni A, Caiaffa MF, Macchia L. 2001. Beauvericin: chemistry, biology and significance. In Advances in Microbial Toxin Research and Its Biotechnological Exploitation, ed. Upadhyay RK. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Science Publishers. pp 23–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-4439-2_2
    [19]

    Tomoda H, Huang XH, Cao J, Nishida H, Nagao R, et al. 1992. Inhibition of acylCoA: cholesterol acyltransferase activity by cyclodepsipeptide antibiotics. The Journal of Antibiotics 45:1626−32

    doi: 10.7164/antibiotics.45.1626

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [20]

    Gavazzi G, Tonelli C, Todesco G, Arreghini E, Raffaldi F, et al. 1987. Somaclonal variation versus chemically induced mutagenesis in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum L.). Theoretical and Applied Genetics 74:733−38

    doi: 10.1007/BF00247550

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [21]

    Péreau-Leroy P. 1958. Le palmier dattier au Maroc. Paris: Institut français de recherches fruitières outremer, Mission au Maroc. 142 pp.
    [22]

    El Hadarami A, El Idrissi-Tourane A, El Hassni M, Daayf F, El Hadrami I. 2005. Toxin-based in-vitro selection and its potential application to date palm for resistance to the bayoud Fusarium wilt. Comptes Rendus Biologies 328:732−44

    doi: 10.1016/j.crvi.2005.05.007

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [23]

    Smith RH, Duncan RR, Bhaskaran S. 1993. In vitro selection and somaclonal variation for crop improvement. In International Crop Science I, eds. Buxton DR, Shibles R, Forsberg RA, Blad BL, Asay KH, et al. United States of America: Crop Science Society of America. pp. 269−632. https://doi.org/10.2135/1993.internationalcropscience.c99
    [24]

    Wilson CR, Tegg RS, Wilson AJ, Luckman GA, Eyles A, et al. 2010. Stable and extreme resistance to common scab of potato obtained through somatic cell selection. Phytopathology 100:460−67

    doi: 10.1094/PHYTO-100-5-0460

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [25]

    Esmaiel NM, Al-Doss AA, Barakat MN. 2012. In vitro selection for resistance to Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. dianthi and detection of genetic polymorphism via RAPD analysis in carnation. Journal of Medicinal Plants Research 6:3997−4004

    doi: 10.5897/jmpr12.150

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [26]

    Purwati RD, Budi US, Sudarsono S. 2007. Penggunaan asam fusarat dalam seleksi in vitro untuk resistensi abaka terhadap Fusarium oxysporum f.sp. cubense. Industrial Crops Research Journal 13:64−72

    Google Scholar

    [27]

    Matsumoto K, Barbosa ML, Souza LAC, Teixeira JB. 1999. In vitro selection for Fusarium wilt resistance in banana. II. Resistance to culture filtrate of race 1 Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense. Fruits 54:151−57

    Google Scholar

    [28]

    Murashige T, Skoog F. 1962. A revised medium for rapid growth and bio assays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiologia Plantarum 15:473−97

    doi: 10.1111/j.1399-3054.1962.tb08052.x

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

    [29]

    Molina AB, Sinohin VO, Fabregar EG, Ramillete EB, Loayan MM, et al. 2016. Field resistance of Cavendish somaclonal variants and local banana cultivars to tropical race 4 of Fusarium wilt in the Philippines. Acta Horticulturae 1114:227−30

    doi: 10.17660/actahortic.2016.1114.31

    CrossRef   Google Scholar

  • Cite this article

    Cruz MA, Alcasid C, Millado CS, Balendres MA. 2023. Toxicity of fusaric acid and beauvericin in tissue-cultured banana 'Grand Nain' and 'Lakatan'. Technology in Horticulture 3:15 doi: 10.48130/TIH-2023-0015
    Cruz MA, Alcasid C, Millado CS, Balendres MA. 2023. Toxicity of fusaric acid and beauvericin in tissue-cultured banana 'Grand Nain' and 'Lakatan'. Technology in Horticulture 3:15 doi: 10.48130/TIH-2023-0015
    shu

Figures(4)  /  Tables(2)

Download PDF

Article Metrics

Article views(3592) PDF downloads(545)

Other Articles By Authors

ARTICLE   Open Access    

Toxicity of fusaric acid and beauvericin in tissue-cultured banana 'Grand Nain' and 'Lakatan'

  • 1.

    Institute of Plant Breeding, College of Agriculture and Food Science, University of the Philippines, Los Baños, Laguna, Philippines 4031

  • 2.

    Department of Biological Sciences and Environmental Studies, College of Science and Mathematics, University of the Philippines Mindanao, Philippines 8022

  • 3.

    Department of Biology, College of Science, De La Salle University, Manila, Philippines 1004

  • Received: 23 April 2023
  • Accepted: 18 May 2023
  • Published online: 04 September 2023
Technology in Horticulture  3,  Article number: 15  (2023)  |  Cite this article

Abstract: Fusarium oxysporum forma specialis cubense (Foc) produces toxins known to contribute to virulence and infection in the host. Fusaric acid (FA) and beauvericin (BEA) are major toxins contributing to Foc virulence in the host plant. Recent advancements allow the production of disease-resistant crops via cell selection, a process that involves resistance screening of somaclones using phytotoxin exposure. Determination of the appropriate concentration is an important step for the toxin-based selection of disease-resistant plants. In this study, the toxicity of FA (0, 5, 10, 20, 30, 50, and 100 μm) and BEA (0, 5, 10, and 20 μm) in different tissues of banana cv. ‘Grand Nain’ and 'Lakatan' were investigated. Overall results indicated a positive relationship between the toxin concentration and plant sensitivity, as indicated by the degree of vascular browning rate. Results demonstrated that lower concentrations of BEA are required for phytotoxicity than in FA. Furthermore, a higher degree of vascular browning was recorded in the test tissues of ‘Lakatan’ treated with FA and BEA than in the ‘Grand Nain’ genotype suggesting genotype-dependent sensitivity of banana to phytotoxins. To our knowledge, this study is the first to investigate the phytotoxicity of FA and BEA in callus cultures of banana ‘Lakatan.’

    HTML

    Introduction

    • Fusarium wilt, caused by Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense (Foc), is an economically important disease affecting banana. Wilting results from the restrictive movement of water in the vascular bundles[1]. However, part of the pathogenesis and invasion of plants by Foc can be attributed to toxic metabolites produced by the fungus[2]. Major toxins of Foc include fusaric acid and beauvericin, which act as virulence factors for infection by causing significant browning of vascular tissues and plant necrosis[3−5].

      Fusaric acid (FA) is a non-specific toxin many fungal pathogens produce[6]. Based on previous studies, FA supports disease development through the induction of cell membrane early super polarization[3], H+ pumping, K+ leaking suppression[7], mineral chelation[8] and inhibition of plant defensive enzymes activity, leading to reduced cell viability[9], changes in membrane permeability and potential[7,10], and production of reactive oxygen species[11]. Previously, Brown et al. recorded that lack of FA production did not affect the virulence of F. oxysporum in cacti or F. verticillioides in maize seedlings[12]. In contrast, several studies reported the importance of FA production in the virulence of Foc in banana[2,5,13].

      Meanwhile, beauvericin (BEA) is a secondary metabolite produced by several species from the Fusarium fujikuroi species complex[14] and the entomopathogenic fungus Beauveria bassiana[15]. Although FA and BEA are major toxins of Foc, the two are not considered mycotoxins with significant human, animal, food, and feed safety risks[2]. Still, some studies have documented physiologic disorders in experimental animals and human cell lines treated with FA[16] and BEA[17−19].

      Phytotoxin insensitivity of plant cell lines can be used as a potential marker in breeding programs for early screening of resistance against plant pathogens[20,21]. The approach requires a significant correlation between toxin sensitivity and host susceptibility to the pathogens producing them[22]. Several studies have taken advantage of this via somaclonal cell selection - a technique that utilizes phytotoxins as selective agents for developing resistant clones against economically important diseases such as common scab of potato[23,24]. Production of Fusarium wilt-resistant date palm[22], carnation[25], abaca[26], and banana cv. 'Maca'[27] has also been reported by cell selection. Yet, little attention has been given to the phytotoxicity of Foc metabolites in banana.

      This study determined the phytotoxicity of FA and BEA in leaf tissues, multiple bud clumps, tissue-cultured plantlets, and calli in-vitro. These results would aid in determining the appropriate concentration of the metabolites for somaclonal cell selection.

    Materials and methods

      Toxin preparation and assay

    • The test substances: fusaric acid (≥ 99% purity, CAS No. 536-69-6) and beauvericin (≥ 97% purity, CAS No. 28048-05-5), were obtained from Sigma-Aldrich. The toxins were dissolved in 0.05% methanol to obtain a 10 mM stock solution. The stock solution was then filter-sterilized by passing through Whatmann no.1 filter paper (125 mm size) (CAT no. 1001-125, GE Healthcare Life Sciences) and stored in a 4 °C refrigerator until use.

      Phytotoxicity testing in different tissues of banana

    • Different concentrations of fusaric acid (FA) and beauvericin (BEA) in tissue-cultured Cavendish plantlets, multiple bud clumps (MBC), callus, and attached leaf tissues were determined. FA stock solution was further diluted to 0, 1, 5, 10, 20, 30, 50, 70, 100 μm concentrations by adding desired concentrations in culture medium. Meanwhile, 0, 1, 5, 10, and 20 μm BEA were tested. These concentrations were selected based on the previous findings of Li et al.[2] on the phytotoxicity of FA and BEA in tissue-cultured plantlets of banana.

      For tissue-cultured plantlets tests, tissue-cultured 'Grand Nain' and 'Lakatan' were obtained from the National Plant Genetic Resources Laboratory (NPGRL), IPB, UPLB. We used 'Grand Nain' because it is commercially propagated in Mindanao, where the Foc TR4 is present. 'Lakatan' was also used since it is a local variety commonly grown in the Philippines, especially by small-scale growers. The tissue-cultured materials were cultured and maintained in the laboratory for micropropagation. The plantlets were propagated by cutting a 2-cm segment of tissue containing the pseudostem and apical meristems. The tissues were then cut in half and cultured in a multiplication-inducing medium which consisted of Murashige and Skoog medium[28] + 3 mg·L−1 BAP. Four segments were placed in each glass jar. Cultures were maintained in 14 h light with temperature ranging from 20 ± 5 °C. Cultures were routinely transferred in the same medium every two weeks to prevent browning. One-month-old tissue-cultured plantlets with roots were transferred in test tubes containing 10 ml liquid medium and treated with FA and BEA by pipetting desired concentration in the medium. Plantlets treated with sterile distilled water served as control. Cultures were maintained in 8 h light at ambient temperature (20 ± 5 °C).

      For multiple bud clumps studies, the protocol of Matsumoto et al.[27] was used to produce multiple bud clumps. Rhizome tissues were cut from 'Grand Nain' and 'Lakatan' shoot cultures and were grown in MS medium containing BAP (5 mg·L−1) to initiate multiple bud clump (MBC) formations. Cultures were maintained under the same conditions as previously mentioned. One-month-old bud clumps were harvested from a multiple bud clump and transferred into test tubes containing 10 ml liquid medium. Five individual buds were placed in each tube and treated with FA and BEA as previously described.

      Corm segments (approximately 2 cm in size) were cut from one-month-old shoot cultures of banana cv for callus studies. 'Grand Nain' and 'Lakatan' and inoculated on MS basal medium supplemented with 2,4-dichloro phenoxy acetic acid (1.0 mg·L−1) and myo-inositol (50 mg·L−1). Cultures were stored in dark conditions under a chamber covered with black cloth and incubated at ambient temperature (20 ± 5 °C). Individual calli were harvested eight weeks post-inoculation and transferred into test tubes containing 10 ml liquid medium. Five individual calli were placed in each tube and treated with FA and BEA as previously described.

      For the attached leaf assay, tissue-cultured 'Grand Nain' and 'Lakatan' with multiple shoots were grown in basal MS medium for rooting. After one month, the rooted plantlets were acclimatized and transferred to plastic bags containing sterile soil in the nursery. The plantlets were grown for two months and watered daily. FA and BEA were diluted to the desired concentration by adding sterile distilled water in 1.5 ml Eppendorf tubes. The attached leaves were inoculated by pipetting 20 μl of solution in wounded (pricked using a syringe needle) tissues. The experiment was repeated twice.

      Data collection and statistical analyses

    • The phytotoxicity of fusaric acid (FA) and beauvericin (BEA) in different banana tissues was assessed ten days post-inoculation. Wilting rates were measured ocularly based on the 10-point arbitrary scale produced. A one-way ANOVA was performed to identify significant differences between treatments using Statistical Tool for Agricultural Research (STAR Nebula) with a 95% confidence level.

    Results

    • Wilting of different tissues treated with fusaric acid (FA) and beauvericin (BEA) was observed ten days post-inoculation. Ten-point visual hedonic browning scales were developed based on varying degrees of wilting (Fig. 1a−c). The rating scales were used to measure the degree of phytotoxicity in tissue-cultured plantlets (TC plantlets), multiple bud clumps (MBC), and callus cultures.

      Figure 1. 

      Ten point rating scales produced in this study for measuring degree of wilting in (a) tissue cultured plantlets, (b) calli, and (c) multiple bud clumps, as caused by Fusarium toxins.

      Overall, there is an increasing trend between the toxin concentration and the degree of browning observed (Figs 2−4). For both 'Grand Nain' and 'Lakatan,' the highest browning rates were observed in tissues treated with 100 μm FA and 20 μm BEA (Tables 1 & 2). A higher degree of browning was recorded in 'Lakatan' TC plantlets, MBC, and callus than in 'Grand Nain,' except in TC plantlets treated with 20 μm BEA, where a higher average browning rate score was observed in 'Grand Nain' (9) than in 'Lakatan' (Tables 1 & 2).

      Figure 2. 

      Browning rates of tissue-cultured plantlets, calli, and multiple bud clumps of banana cvs. (a), (b) ‘Grand Nain’ and (c), (d) ‘Lakatan' treated with varying concentrations of FA and BEA at 10 d post-incubation.

      Average browning rates of 'Grand Nain' TC plantlets, MBC, and callus treated with 100 μm FA were 3.4, 7.8, and 9.6, respectively, using the 10-point system (Table 1). Meanwhile, on average, the browning rates of tissue-cultured 'Lakatan' TC plantlets, multiple bud clumps, and calli treated with the same concentration were 6.8, 9.6, and 10 (Table 1). For phytotoxicity tests using BEA, 'Grand Nain' TC plantlets, MBC, and callus scored 9, 8.8, and 7.6, while the same tissues of 'Lakatan' scored 7.0, 9.8, and 8.8, respectively (Table 2).

      Table 1.  Wilting rates of different tissues of banana 10 d after fusaric acid treatment.

      FA (µm)'Grand Nain''Lakatan'
      TC plantletMBCCallusTC plantletMBCCallus
      Control0.8 ± 0.37b0.6 ± 0.24c0.2 ± 0.20d0.4 ± 0.24c0.4 ± 0.24e7.8 ± 0.37ab
      11.8 ± 0.49ab1.2 ± 0.20c1.2 ± 0.20cd1.0 ± 0.55c1.4 ± 0.24e2.4 ± 0.68e
      51.6 ± 0.60ab3.8 ± 0.86bc1.4 ± 0.24cd1.2 ± 0.20c1.8 ± 0.37de3.0 ± 0.45e
      101.4 ± 0.24b4.0 ± 1.48bc2.0 ± 0.00cd0.4 ± 0.24c3.8 ± 0.58cd3.6 ± 0.51de
      201.6 ± 0.40ab4.4 ± 1.50abc2.6 ± 0.24c2.0 ± 0.32c5.6 ± 0.24bc3.8 ± 0.58de
      301.4 ± 0.40b4.0 ± 0.00bc5.2 ± 1.24b2.0 ± 0.00c3.6 ± 0.75cd5.4 ± 0.68cd
      501.6 ± 0.24ab7.3 ± 0.56ab7.2 ± 0.49b4.8 ± 0.49b6.0 ± 0.63b7.0 ± 0.00bc
      1003.4 ± 0.24a7.8 ± 0.92a9.6 ± 0.24a6.8 ± 0.80a10.0 ± 0.00a9.6 ± 0.24a
      Values represent the mean ± SE of five replicates Means in a column with the same letter are not significantly different (p > 0.05).

      Table 2.  Wilting rates of different tissues of banana 10 d after beauvericin treatment.

      BEA
      (µm)      		'Grand Nain''Lakatan'
      TC plantletMBCCallusTC plantletMBCCallus
      Control1.0 ± 0.32d0.6 ± 0.40c0.6 ± 0.24d0.4 ± 0.24d0.0 ± 0.55e0.4 ± 0.00d
      14.0 ± 0.63c1.2 ± 0.20c3.2 ± 0.37c1.6 ± 0.24c7.2 ± 0.55d1.4 ± 0.84c
      54.6 ± 0.75c5.4 ± 0.40b4.6 ± 0.51b2.8 ± 0.20b8.4 ± 0.55c4.6 ± 0.55b
      106.8 ± 0.37b6.0 ± 0.32b6.6 ± 0.24a6.2 ± 0.37a9.2 ± 0.55b6.6 ± 0.45a
      209.0 ± 0.45a8.8 ± 0.37a7.6 ± 0.24a7.0 ± 0.45a9.8 ± 0.84a8.8 ± 0.45a
      Values represent the mean ± SE of five replicates Means in a column with the same letter are not significantly different (p > 0.05).

      Treatment with FA and BEA significantly affected the browning rate compared to the control treatment (Tables 1 & 2). For 'Grand Nain,' the browning rate of TC plantlets and MBC significantly increased at 100 μm and 50 μm concentrations, respectively. At the same time, a significant increase in browning can be observed in callus cultures in as low as 20 μm FA (Fig. 3). FA also caused a significant browning of 'Lakatan' TC plantlets and MBC at 50 and 10 μm concentrations, respectively (Fig. 4). Additionally, 1 μm FA sufficiently caused significant browning in 'Lakatan' callus (Table 2, Fig. 4). BEA, at 1 μm concentration, already caused significant browning for both 'Grand Nain' and 'Lakatan' genotypes (Figs 3 & 4), except in 'Grand Nain' MBC where 5 μm BEA significantly affected the browning rate (Fig. 3). For both 'Grand Nain' and 'Lakatan' attached leaf tissues assay, browning around the inoculated sites were observed with 10 μm and 20 μm FA and BEA (Figs 3 & 4). But more severe symptoms were observed in the 'Lakatan' genotype than in 'Grand Nain' (Figs 3 & 4).

      Figure 3. 

      Toxic effect of FA and BEA in different tissues of banana cv. 'Grand Nain'. Varying concentrations were tested in (a), (d) one-month old tissue-cultured plantlets, (b), (e) multiple buds clumps, (c), (f) callus and (g) attached leaf tissues of two-month old greenhouse plantlets were used. Symptoms were assessed at 10 d post-inoculation.

      Figure 4. 

      Toxic effect of FA and BEA in different tissues of banana cv. 'Lakatan'. (a), (d) Varying concentrations were tested in one-month old tissue-cultured plantlets, (b), (e) multiple bud clumps, (c), (f) callus and (g) attached leaf tissues of two-month old greenhouse plantlets were used. Symptoms were assessed at 10 d post-inoculation.

    Discussion

    • This study demonstrated the phytotoxic effect of varying fusaric acid (FA) and beauvericin (BEA) concentrations in banana 'Grand Nain' and 'Lakatan'. The results were consistent with the previous findings of Li et al.[2], where 100 µm FA and 20 µm BEA sufficiently caused toxicity in tissue-cultured bananas. However, a lower concentration of BEA (1 µm) was found to cause wilting in this study. The arbitrary 10-point visual hedonic scales used in this study could be used to measure the phytotoxicity of Fusarium toxins in the test tissues of banana. A higher degree of vascular browning was recorded in the test tissues of 'Lakatan' treated with FA and BEA than in the 'Grand Nain' genotype. This suggests that banana sensitivity to phytotoxins differs from one genotype to another. In a study conducted by Molina et al., they recorded relatively higher susceptibility and disease incidence of 'Lakatan' in the field than in the 'Grand Nain' genotype[29]. Thus, the sensitivity rate of banana tissues to phytotoxins (FA and BEA) in-vitro may be correlated with its susceptibility to Fusarium wilt disease in the field.

      The degree of browning rates of test plants: tissue-cultured plantlets (TC plantlets), multiple bud clumps (MBC), callus, and attached leaf tissues to FA and BEA varied from one another. Higher susceptibility of callus and MBC than TC plantlets and attached leaf tissues were observed, which indicated higher sensitivity of the tissues to the phytotoxins. This confirms callus and MBC as suitable materials for screening resistant cell lines via somatic cell selection due to heightened toxin sensitivity, although the reason behind this is still unclear. A lower browning rate of attached leaf tissues than in in-vitro test plants demonstrated that toxin sensitivity was more pronounced in vitro than in planta. This may be attributed to several factors, including the environment and the type of tissues[2].

    Conclusions

    • Fusaric acid (FA) and beauvericin (BEA) are toxic to banana 'Grand Nain' and 'Lakatan' through significant vascular browning. The arbitrary 10-point visual hedonic scales developed in this study for tissue-cultured plantlets (TC plantlets), multiple bud clumps (MBC), and callus tissues could be used to measure the phytotoxicity of Fusarium toxins. The higher degree of vascular browning observed in 'Lakatan' banana treated with FA and BEA toxins than in 'Grand Nain' suggested genotype-dependent toxin sensitivity and subsequent susceptibility of banana to Fusarium wilt disease, although further data are needed to support this. Data obtained here would aid in determining the effective concentration for toxin-based cell selection using callus and MBC cultures.

      Acknowledgments

      • This study was supported by the Department of Agriculture- Bureau of Agricultural Research (DA-BAR), Philippines. We thank Fe dela Cueva, Edzel Evallo, Diana Rose Biglete, Monica Fronda, Yron Retuta, Rodel Pia, Pamela Quintos, May Eljera, Loida Pascual, Flora R. Cuevas, Rochelle Delgado, and Eugene Parañaque for the technical assistance and support. Special thanks to the Fruit Crops Section and the National Plant Genetic Resources Laboratory of the Institute of Plant Breeding, College of Agriculture and Food Science for providing the banana cultures and plantlets.

      Conflict of interest

      • The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

      Rights and permissions
      • Copyright: © 2023 by the author(s). Published by Maximum Academic Press, Fayetteville, GA. This article is an open access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
    Figure (4)  Table (2) References (29)
  • About this article
    Cite this article
    Cruz MA, Alcasid C, Millado CS, Balendres MA. 2023. Toxicity of fusaric acid and beauvericin in tissue-cultured banana 'Grand Nain' and 'Lakatan'. Technology in Horticulture 3:15 doi: 10.48130/TIH-2023-0015
    Cruz MA, Alcasid C, Millado CS, Balendres MA. 2023. Toxicity of fusaric acid and beauvericin in tissue-cultured banana 'Grand Nain' and 'Lakatan'. Technology in Horticulture 3:15 doi: 10.48130/TIH-2023-0015
    shu

Catalog

  • HTML

  • Introduction
  • Materials and methods

  • Toxin preparation and assay

  • Phytotoxicity testing in different tissues of banana

  • Data collection and statistical analyses

  • Results
  • Discussion
  • Conclusions
  • Acknowledgments
  • Conflict of interest
  • Rights and permissions
  • About this article
logo

Contents

Policies

Services

Partnerships

© 2025 Maximum Academic Press, except Open Access articles. MAP is a member of ALPSP, COPE, CrossRef, cOAlition S, OASPA and STM.

Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Terms and Conditions

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return