Table 3.
Identification of Nicotiana benthamiana NBS‐LRR candidates involved in recognition of PaRLXR24
| NBS‐LRR Genome v. 0.4.4 (v. 1.0.1) a | Hairpin screen | VIGS screen | NBS‐LRR type | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hairpin b | Suppression (%) c | Silencing efficiency (% ± SD) d | TRV construct g | Suppression (%) f | Ion leakage (%) g | Silencing efficiency (% ± SD) d | ||
| 8754g0022.1 (05566g02009.1; 05566g02008.1) | HP7‐1 | 75.0 | 33.7 ± 10.7 | TRV‐NLR3 | Yes | 51.3* | 82.5 ± 5.0 | RPM1‐like h |
| TRV‐NLR5 | Yes | 60.1* | 79.6 ± 3.0 | |||||
| 1428g0007.1 (05653g00005.1) | HP7‐2 | 81.3 | 11.9 ± 19.1 | TRV‐NLR6 | Yes | 40.8* | 58.1 ± 7.0 | R1‐A‐like i |
| 4955g0024.1 (03461g05022.1) | HP14‐6 | 61.3 | 38.1 ± 9.9 | TRV‐NLR1 | No | 82.4 | 65.0 ± 6.0 | R1‐B‐like i |
| 5032g0004.1 (03924g01008.1; 15476g01014.1) | HP14‐8 | 63.2 | 38.1 ± 15.1 | TRV‐NLR2 | No | 83.9 | 77.1 ± 4.0 | R1‐B‐like |
| TRV‐NLR4 | No | 71.7 | 88.7 ± 3.0 | |||||
Top NBS‐LRR candidates predicted from the N. benthamiana genome v. 0.4.4 (NbS0000 numbers) and equivalent gene models from the genome v. 1.0.1 in parentheses (Niben101Scf numbers). Two of the v. 0.4.4 candidates each had two matches in the N. benthamiana v. 1.0.1 genome.
Hairpin construct used to silence N. benthamiana NBS‐LRR, designed using N. benthamiana genome v. 0.4.4 NBS‐LRR gene models.
Percentage of infiltration spots showing full or partial suppression of PaRXLR24‐triggered cell death.
Silencing efficiency of NBS‐LRR candidates determined by reverse transciptionPCR. 100% is complete loss of NBS‐LRR expression.
Virus‐induced gene silencing (VIGS) construct used to silence N. benthamiana NBS‐LRR, designed using N. benthamiana genome v. 1.0.1.
Infiltration spots showing suppression of PaRXLR24‐triggered cell death on VIGS‐silenced N. benthamiana plants (see Figure S8).
Ion leakage of PaRXLR24‐infiltrated spots in TRV‐NLR1‐6 silenced plants, shown as % conductivity compared to boiled leaf samples. Asterisks (*) indicate PaRXLR24 values significantly different in TRV‐NLR‐silenced plant versus GFP‐silenced plant while values for GFP‐infiltrated control sites on the same plants were not significant.
El Kasmi et al. (2017).
Ballvora et al. (2002).