Skip to main content
. 2019 Oct 28;37(11):1344–1350. doi: 10.1038/s41587-019-0267-z

Fig. 5. Resistance of SWEET promoter edited IR64 and Ciherang-Sub1 lines.

Fig. 5

Reactions of selected mutant lines of T3 IR64-IRS1132 and T2 Ciherang-Sub1-IRS1132 lines as compared to parental IR64 and Ciherang-Sub1 controls to infections with pthXo1-, pthXo2- and avrXa7-dependent Xoo strains (PXO99, PXO339 and PXO86, respectively). Different sequence alterations in the target SWEET promoters of edited lines resulted in varying levels of resistance to corresponding Xoo strains. Lesion lengths (cm) were measured 14 d after infection of specified plants. Types of mutations are indicated. Phenotyping experiments were conducted with four replicates per strain and two plants per replicate (n = 8), and between three and six inoculated leaf samples were scored per plant. All tested lines carried the same mutations in both alleles, except those marked as ‘Bi’ (biallelic, that is, two different mutations in EBE). Center lines show medians; box limits indicate 25th and 75th percentiles determined in the R software package; whiskers extend 1.5 times the interquartile range from 25th and 75th percentiles. Means for all edited lines are significantly different from controls (Dunnett’s test; P < 2 × 1016). A two-sided test was used.