Patent Application
20160326545
This invention relates to the field of plant biotechnology, specifically resistance to Asian Soy Rust.
Asian soybean rust (ASR) is a serious disease caused by the fungus Phakopsora pachyrhizi. Soybean rust is spread by windblown spores and has caused significant crop losses in many soybean-growing regions of the world. On Nov. 10, 2004 USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) announced the first confirmation of Asian soybean rust in the continental United States (Louisiana), followed by finds in 8 additional southern states. In 2005, soybean rust was confirmed on soybeans in 29 counties in Georgia, 23 counties in South Carolina, 21 counties in Alabama, 18 counties in North Carolina, 12 counties in Florida, 2 counties in Mississippi, and one county in Louisiana.
Crop loss estimates range from 10-90% of infested fields depending on the growing region, time of epidemic initiation, and environmental conditions. There are currently no commercial soybeans resistant to ASR.
Thus, there is a continuing need for compositions and methods for conferring resistance to Asian Soy Rust.
Disease in plants is caused by biotic and abiotic causes. Biotic causes include fungi, viruses, bacteria, and nematodes. An example of the importance of plant disease is illustrated by phytopathogenic fungi, which cause significant annual crop yield losses as well as devastating epidemics. Plant disease outbreaks have resulted in catastrophic crop failures that have triggered famines and caused major social change. All of the approximately 300,000 species of flowering plants are attacked by pathogenic fungi; however, a single plant species can be host to only a few fungal species, and similarly, most fungi usually have a limited host range. Generally, the best strategy for plant disease control is to use resistant cultivars selected or developed by plant breeders for this purpose. However, the potential for serious crop disease epidemics persists today, as evidenced by outbreaks of the Victoria blight of oats and southern corn leaf blight. Molecular methods of crop protection have the potential to implement novel mechanisms for disease resistance and can also be implemented more quickly than traditional breeding methods. Accordingly, molecular methods are needed to supplement traditional breeding methods to protect plants from pathogen attack.
A host of cellular processes enable plants to defend themselves against diseases caused by pathogenic agents. These defense mechanisms are activated by initial pathogen infection in a process known as elicitation. In elicitation, the host plant recognizes a pathogen-derived compound known as an elicitor; the plant then activates disease gene expression to limit further spread of the invading organism. It is generally believed that to overcome these plant defense mechanisms, plant pathogens must find a way to suppress elicitation as well as to overcome more physically-based barriers to infection, such as reinforcement of the plant cell wall and/or rearrangement of the actin filament networks near the cell's plasma membrane.
Thus, the present invention solves the need for enhancement of the plant's defensive elicitation response via a molecularly based mechanism which can be quickly incorporated into commercial crops.
Pathogens secrete protein molecules that are either localized to the plant apoplast or are taken up into the plant cell. These proteins, termed effectors, can have either an avirulence or virulence function. In the former case, recognition by the cognate plant R protein activates host defense responses, ultimately leading to programmed cell death and resistance to the pathogen.
The virulence activity of effectors is associated with the manipulation of normal host cell functions or the suppression of host defense responses by the pathogen in order to establish successful infection.
Major gene resistance which relies on the gene-for-gene relationship between pathogen avirulence and plant resistance genes, has been widely used in breeding approaches. However, such resistance is typically race-specific and easily overcome by single mutations in the pathogen avr gene as a consequence of diversifying selection to avoid recognition by the host. Thus the durability of such qualitative resistance is of concern. Attempts have been made to introduce novel antimicrobial/antifungal genes or to modify expression of endogenous defense-related genes in transgenic plants. However, in many cases, the effect is partial and comes at a cost to plant yield and or vigor.
In the present invention, the resistance strategy is focused on the inactivation of pathogen molecules that are essential to establishment of Asian soybean rust infection. Different approaches are being taken to inhibit the activity of these critical soy rust molecules, termed “effectors”. Random high throughput screening of phage display or peptide antibody libraries ma be performed to identify short sequences that bind the fungal effector and block its functional activity. These may be high affinity peptide sequences that prevent interaction of the effector with its host target.
Alternatively, sequences identified through this approach may exhibit tight binding with effector moieties that specify uptake into host cells. In the latter case inhibition would derive from blocking entry of pathogen factors into the host cell, while in the former, effectors that are delivered into the host cytoplasm are prevented from interacting with and interfering with host target proteins. High affinity, inhibitory peptides may be over-expressed in transgenic plants and their effectiveness tested in ASR disease assays.
In a second approach, effector inhibitors may be designed based upon the targets of those pathogen molecules. Host targets may first be identified by yeast-2-hybrid screens, and then variants generated that exhibit altered effector binding activity. Of particular interest may be host target variants that fail to bind effector, but retain normal activity in the plant, or variants with significantly enhanced binding affinity that prevent interaction of the effector with the native target. The native target and the variants may be overexpressed in transgenic plants and the sensitivity to rust infection evaluated in comparison to wild type plants.
It is expected that through such approaches, it may be possible to inactivate several pathogen effectors and thus to interfere with the ability of the pathogen to infect soybean. Such a strategy can be used alone or in combination with other strategies to produce transgenic Asian soybean rust resistant plants.
These additional strategies include but are no means limited to modified expression of endogenous plant defense molecules or ectopic expression of novel molecules from other plant, microbial or animal sources. These protein molecules can include plant immune receptors such as intracellular NB-LRR proteins or extracellular pattern recognition receptors, or antifungal proteins such as plant or microbial defensins
Sequences of Phakopsora candidate effectors can be introduced into plants as part of overexpression or silencing constructs. In both cases, in planta expression can provide information about functional activity of the pathogen protein or virulence activity. Overexpression of bacterial or oomycete effectors in plants has been associated with visible phenotypes such as leaf chlorosis, induction of cell death, plant stunting, etc. In planta expression can additionally produce an alteration in plant susceptibility to pathogen infection. In the latter case, enhanced plant resistance might be expected if in planta expression of the pathogen effector leads to elicitation of plant defense responses. Silencing constructs of pathogen genes would be expected to be processed by the plant RNAi machinery to produce small RNA molecules that are taken up by the pathogen, and interact with the RISC complex to target the pathogen mRNA for degradation. Gene silencing and a loss of function phenotype can thus give important clues to the role of the pathogen genes in determining pathogen virulence and infectivity. In addition, down regulation of critical virulence genes can lead to compromised pathogenicity and therefore, increased plant resistance.
The compositions and methods of the invention are useful for modulating the levels of at least one protein in a plant. By “modulate” is defined herein as an increase or decrease in the level of a protein within a genetically altered plant relative to the level of that protein from the corresponding wild-type plant (i.e., a plant not genetically altered in accordance with the methods of the present invention).
The terms “inhibit,” “inhibition,” “inhibiting”, “reduced”, “reduction” and the like as used herein refer to any decrease in the expression or function of a target gene product, including any relative decrease in expression or function up to and including complete abrogation of expression or function of the target gene product. The term “expression” as used herein in the context of a gene product refers to the biosynthesis of that gene product, including the transcription and/or translation of the gene product. Inhibition of expression or function of a target gene product (i.e., a gene product of interest) can be in the context of a comparison between any two plants, for example, expression or function of a target gene product in a genetically altered plant versus the expression or function of that target gene product in a corresponding wild-type plant. Alternatively, inhibition of expression or function of the target gene product can be in the context of a comparison between plant cells, organelles, organs, tissues, or plant parts within the same plant or between plants, and includes comparisons between developmental or temporal stages within the same plant or between plants. Any method or composition that down-regulates expression of a target gene product, either at the level of transcription or translation, or down-regulates functional activity of the target gene product can be used to achieve inhibition of expression or function of the target gene product.
The term “inhibitory sequence” encompasses any polynucleotide or polypeptide sequence that is capable of inhibiting the expression of a target gene product, for example, at the level of transcription or translation, or which is capable of inhibiting the function of a target gene product. Examples of inhibitory sequences include, but are not limited to, full-length polynucleotide or polypeptide sequences, truncated polynucleotide or polypeptide sequences, fragments of polynucleotide or polypeptide sequences, variants of polynucleotide or polypeptide sequences, sense-oriented nucleotide sequences, antisense-oriented nucleotide sequences, the complement of a sense- or antisense-oriented nucleotide sequence, inverted regions of nucleotide sequences, hairpins of nucleotide sequences, double-stranded nucleotide sequences, single-stranded nucleotide sequences, combinations thereof, and the like. The term “polynucleotide sequence” includes sequences of RNA, DNA, chemically modified nucleic acids, nucleic acid analogs, combinations thereof, and the like.
Methods for inhibiting gene expression are well known in the art. Although any method known in the art for reducing the level of protein in a plant could be used, possible methods for reducing protein include, but are not limited to, homology-dependent gene silencing, antisense technology, co-suppression including, for example, RNA interference (RNAi), micro RNA and the like, site-specific recombination, site-specific integration, mutagenesis including transposon tagging, and biosynthetic competition, homologous recombination, and gene targeting, alone or in combination. Depending upon the intended goal, the level of at least one protein may be increased, decreased, or eliminated entirely as described below.
The invention encompasses isolated or substantially purified nucleic acid or protein compositions. An “isolated” or “purified” nucleic acid molecule or protein, or biologically active portion thereof, is substantially or essentially free from components that normally accompany or interact with the nucleic acid molecule or protein as found in its naturally occurring environment. Thus, an isolated or purified nucleic acid molecule or protein is substantially free of other cellular material, or culture medium when produced by recombinant techniques, or substantially free of chemical precursors or other chemicals when chemically synthesized. Preferably, an “isolated” nucleic acid is free of sequences (preferably protein encoding sequences) that naturally flank the nucleic acid (i.e., sequences located at the 5′ and 3′ ends of the nucleic acid) in the genomic DNA of the organism from which the nucleic acid is derived. For example, in various embodiments, the isolated nucleic acid molecule can contain less than about 5 kb, 4 kb, 3 kb, 2 kb, 1 kb, 0.5 kb, or 0.1 kb of nucleotide sequences that naturally flank the nucleic acid molecule in genomic DNA of the cell from which the nucleic acid is derived. A protein that is substantially free of cellular material includes preparations of protein having less than about 30%, 20%, 10%, 5%, or 1% (by dry weight) of contaminating protein. When the protein of the invention or biologically active portion thereof is recombinantly produced, preferably culture medium represents less than about 30%, 20%, 10%, 5%, or 1% (by dry weight) of chemical precursors or non-protein-of-interest chemicals.
Fragments and variants of the disclosed nucleotide sequences and proteins encoded thereby are also encompassed by the present invention. By “fragment” is intended a portion of the nucleotide sequence or a portion of the amino acid sequence and hence protein encoded thereby. Fragments of a nucleotide sequence may encode protein fragments that retain the biological activity of the native protein and hence have effector-like activity and thereby affect development, developmental pathways, and defense responses. Alternatively, fragments of a nucleotide sequence that are useful as hybridization probes generally do not encode fragment proteins retaining biological activity. Thus, fragments of a nucleotide sequence may range from at least about 20 nucleotides, about 50 nucleotides, about 100 nucleotides, and up to the full-length nucleotide sequence encoding the proteins of the invention.
The sequences of the invention are provided in expression cassettes or DNA constructs for expression in the plant of interest. The cassette can include 5′ and 3′ regulatory sequences operably linked to a sequence of the invention. By “operably linked” a functional linkage between a promoter and a second sequence, wherein the promoter sequence initiates and mediates transcription of the DNA sequence corresponding to the second sequence is intended. Generally, operably linked means that the nucleic acid sequences being linked are contiguous and, where necessary to join two protein coding regions, contiguous and in the same reading frame. The cassette may additionally contain at least one additional gene to be cotransformed into the organism. Alternatively, the additional gene(s) can be provided on multiple expression cassettes.
Such an expression cassette is provided with a plurality of restriction sites for insertion of the nucleotide sequence to be under the transcriptional regulation of the regulatory regions. The expression cassette may additionally contain selectable marker genes.
The expression cassette can include in the 5′-3′ direction of transcription, a transcriptional and translational initiation region, a DNA sequence of the invention, and a transcriptional and translational termination region functional in plants. The transcriptional initiation region, the promoter, may be native or analogous or foreign or heterologous to the plant host. Additionally, the promoter may be the natural sequence or alternatively a synthetic sequence. By “foreign” is intended that the transcriptional initiation region is not found in the native plant into which the transcriptional initiation region is introduced. As used herein, a chimeric gene comprises a coding sequence operably linked to a transcription initiation region that is heterologous to the coding sequence.
While it may be preferable to express the sequences using heterologous promoters, native promoter sequences may be used. Such constructs would change expression levels in the host cell (i.e., plant or plant cell). Thus, the phenotype of the host cell (i.e., plant or plant cell) is altered.
The termination region may be native with the transcriptional initiation region, may be native with the operably linked DNA sequence of interest, or may be derived from another source. Convenient termination regions are available from the Ti-plasmid of A. tumefaciens, such as the octopine synthase and nopaline synthase termination regions. See also Guerineau et al. (1991) Mol. Gen. Genet. 262:141-144; Proudfoot (1991) Cell 64:671-674; Sanfacon et al. (1991) Genes Dev. 5:141-149; Mogen et al. (1990) Plant Cell 2:1261-1272; Munroe et al. (1990) Gene 91:151-158; Ballas et al. (1989) Nucleic Acids Res. 17:7891-7903; and Joshi et al. (1987) Nucleic Acid Res. 15:9627-9639.
Where appropriate, the gene(s) may be optimized for increased expression in the transformed plant. That is, the genes can be synthesized using plant-preferred codons for improved expression. See, for example, Campbell and Gowri (1990) Plant Physiol. 92:1-11 for a discussion of host-preferred codon usage. Methods are available in the art for synthesizing plant-preferred genes. See, for example, U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,380,831, 5,436,391, and Murray et al. (1989) Nucleic Acids Res. 17:477-498, herein incorporated by reference.
Additional sequence modifications are known to enhance gene expression in a cellular host. These include elimination of sequences encoding spurious polyadenylation signals, exon-intron splice site signals, transposon-like repeats, and other such well-characterized sequences that may be deleterious to gene expression. The G-C content of the sequence may be adjusted to levels average for a given cellular host, as calculated by reference to known genes expressed in the host cell. When possible, the sequence is modified to avoid predicted hairpin secondary mRNA structures.
The expression cassettes may additionally contain 5′ leader sequences in the expression cassette construct. Such leader sequences can act to enhance translation. Translation leaders are known in the art and include: picornavirus leaders, for example, EMCV leader (Encephalomyocarditis 5′ noncoding region) (Elroy Stein et al. (1989) PNAS USA 86:6126 6130); potyvirus leaders, for example, TEV leader (Tobacco Etch Virus) (Allison et al. (1986); MDMV leader (Maize Dwarf Mosaic Virus); Virology 154:9 20), and human immunoglobulin heavy chain binding protein (BiP), (Macejak et al. (1991) Nature 353:90 94); untranslated leader from the coat protein mRNA of alfalfa mosaic virus (AMV RNA 4) (Jobling et al. (1987) Nature 325:622 625); tobacco mosaic virus leader (TMV) (Gallie et al. (1989) in Molecular Biology of RNA, ed. Cech (Liss, New York), pp. 237-256); and maize chlorotic mottle virus leader (MCMV) (Lommel et al. (1991) Virology 81:382 385). See also, Della Cioppa et al. (1987) Plant Physiol. 84:965 968. Other methods known to enhance translation can also be utilized, for example, introns, and the like.
In preparing the expression cassette, the various DNA fragments may be manipulated, so as to provide for the DNA sequences in the proper orientation and, as appropriate, in the proper reading frame. Toward this end, adapters or linkers may be employed to join the DNA fragments or other manipulations may be involved to provide for convenient restriction sites, removal of superfluous DNA, removal of restriction sites, or the like. For this purpose, in vitro mutagenesis, primer repair, restriction, annealing, resubstitutions, e.g., transitions and transversions, may be involved.
Generally, the expression cassette can comprise a selectable marker gene for the selection of transformed cells. Selectable marker genes are utilized for the selection of transformed cells or tissues. Marker genes include genes encoding antibiotic resistance, such as those encoding neomycin phosphotransferase II (NEO) and hygromycin phosphotransferase (HPT), as well as genes conferring resistance to herbicidal compounds, such as glyphosate, glufosinate ammonium, bromoxynil, imidazolinones, and 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetate (2,4-D). See generally, Yarranton (1992) Curr. Opin. Biotech. 3:506-511; Christopherson et al. (1992) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89:6314-6318; Yao et al. (1992) Cell 71:63-72; Reznikoff (1992) Mol. Microbiol. 6:2419-2422; Barkley et al. (1980) in The Operon, pp. 177-220; Hu et al. (1987) Cell 48:555-566; Brown et al. (1987) Cell 49:603-612; Figge et al. (1988) Cell 52:713-722; Deuschle et al. (1989) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 86:5400-5404; Fuerst et al. (1989) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 86:2549-2553; Deuschle et al. (1990) Science 248:480-483; Gossen (1993) Ph.D. Thesis, University of Heidelberg; Reines et al. (1993) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 90:1917-1921; Labow et al. (1990) Mol. Cell. Biol. 10:3343-3356; Zambretti et al. (1992) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89:3952-3956; Baim et al. (1991) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 88:5072-5076; Wyborski et al. (1991) Nucleic Acids Res. 19:4647-4653; Hillenand-Wissman (1989) Topics Mol. Struc. Biol. 10:143-162; Degenkolb et al. (1991) Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 35:1591-1595; Kleinschnidt et al. (1988) Biochemistry 27:1094-1104; Bonin (1993) Ph.D. Thesis, University of Heidelberg; Gossen et al. (1992) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89:5547-5551; Oliva et al. (1992) Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 36:913-919; Hlavka et al. (1985) Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology, Vol. 78 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin); Gill et al. (1988) Nature 334:721-724. Such disclosures are herein incorporated by reference.
The above list of selectable marker genes is not meant to be limiting. Any selectable marker gene can be used in the present invention.
A number of promoters can be used in the practice of the invention. The promoters can be selected based on the desired outcome. That is, the nucleic acids can be combined with constitutive, tissue-preferred, or other promoters for expression in the host cell of interest. Such constitutive promoters include, for example, the core promoter of the Rsyn7 promoter and other constitutive promoters disclosed in WO 99/43838 and U.S. Pat. No. 6,072,050; the core CaMV 35S promoter (Odell et al. (1985) Nature 313:810-812); rice actin (McElroy et al. (1990) Plant Cell 2:163-171); ubiquitin (Christensen et al. (1989) Plant Mol. Biol. 12:619-632 and Christensen et al. (1992) Plant Mol. Biol. 18:675-689); pEMU (Last et al. (1991) Theor. Appl. Genet. 81:581-588); MAS (Velten et al. (1984) EMBO J. 3:2723-2730); ALS promoter (U.S. Pat. No. 5,659,026), and the like. Other constitutive promoters include, for example, those disclosed in U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,608,149; 5,608,144; 5,604,121; 5,569,597; 5,466,785; 5,399,680; 5,268,463; 5,608,142; and 6,177,611, herein incorporated by reference.
Generally, it may be beneficial to express the gene from an inducible promoter, particularly from a pathogen-inducible promoter. Such promoters include those from pathogenesis-related proteins (PR proteins), which are induced following infection by a pathogen; e.g., PR proteins, SAR proteins, beta-1,3-glucanase, chitinase, etc. See, for example, Redolfi et al. (1983) Neth. J. Plant Pathol. 89:245-254; Uknes et al. (1992) Plant Cell 4:645-656; and Van Loon (1985) Plant Mol. Virol. 4:111-116. See also WO 99/43819 published September 9, 1999, herein incorporated by reference.
Of interest are promoters that are expressed locally at or near the site of pathogen infection. See, for example, Marineau et al. (1987) Plant Mol. Biol. 9:335-342; Matton et al. (1989) Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions 2:325-331; Somsisch et al. (1986) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 83:2427-2430; Somsisch et al. (1988) Mol. Gen. Genet. 2:93-98; and Yang (1996) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93:14972-14977. See also, Chen et al. (1996) Plant J. 10:955-966; Zhang et al. (1994) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 91:2507-2511; Warner et al. (1993) Plant J. 3:191-201; Siebertz et al. (1989) Plant Cell 1:961-968; U.S. Pat. No. 5,750,386 (nematode-inducible); and the references cited therein. Of particular interest is the inducible promoter for the maize PRms gene, whose expression is induced by the pathogen Fusarium moniliforme (see, for example, Cordero et al. (1992) Physiol. Mol. Plant Path. 41:189-200).
Additionally, as pathogens find entry into plants through wounds or insect damage, a wound-inducible promoter may be used in the constructions of the invention. Such wound-inducible promoters include potato proteinase inhibitor (pin II) gene (Ryan (1990) Ann. Rev. Phytopath. 28:425-449; Duan et al. (1996) Nature Biotechnology 14:494-498); wun1 and wun2, U.S. Pat. No. 5,428,148; win1 and win2 (Stanford et al. (1989) Mol. Gen. Genet. 215:200-208); systemin (McGurl et al. (1992) Science 225:1570-1573); WIP1 (Rohmeier et al. (1993) Plant Mol. Biol. 22:783-792; Eckelkamp et al. (1993) FEBS Letters 323:73-76); MPI gene (Corderok et al. (1994) Plant J. 6(2):141-150); and the like, herein incorporated by reference.
Chemical-regulated promoters can be used to modulate the expression of a gene in a plant through the application of an exogenous chemical regulator. Depending upon the objective, the promoter may be a chemical-inducible promoter, where application of the chemical induces gene expression, or a chemical-repressible promoter, where application of the chemical represses gene expression. Chemical-inducible promoters are known in the art and include, but are not limited to, the maize In2-2 promoter, which is activated by benzenesulfonamide herbicide safeners, the maize GST promoter, which is activated by hydrophobic electrophilic compounds that are used as pre-emergent herbicides, and the tobacco PR-1 a promoter, which is activated by salicylic acid. Other chemical-regulated promoters of interest include steroid-responsive promoters (see, for example, the glucocorticoid-inducible promoter in Schena et al. (1991) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 88:10421-10425 and McNellis et al. (1998) Plant J. 14(2):247-257) and tetracycline-inducible and tetracycline-repressible promoters (see, for example, Gatz et al. (1991) Mol. Gen. Genet. 227:229-237, and U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,814,618 and 5,789,156), herein incorporated by reference.
Tissue-preferred promoters can be utilized to target enhanced expression within a particular plant tissue. Tissue-preferred promoters include Yamamoto et al. (1997) Plant J. 12(2):255-265; Kawamata et al. (1997) Plant Cell Physiol. 38(7):792-803; Hansen et al. (1997) Mol. Gen Genet. 254(3):337-343; Russell et al. (1997) Transgenic Res. 6(2):157-168; Rinehart et al. (1996) Plant Physiol. 112(3):1331-1341; Van Camp et al. (1996) Plant Physiol. 112(2):525-535; Canevascini et al. (1996) Plant Physiol. 112(2):513-524; Yamamoto et al. (1994) Plant Cell Physiol. 35(5):773-778; Lam (1994) Results Probl. Cell Differ. 20:181-196; Orozco et al. (1993) Plant Mol Biol. 23(6):1129-1138; Matsuoka et al. (1993) Proc Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 90(20):9586-9590; and Guevara-Garcia et al. (1993) Plant J. 4(3):495-505. Such promoters can be modified, if necessary, for weak expression.
Leaf-specific promoters are known in the art. See, for example, Yamamoto et al. (1997) Plant J. 12(2):255-265; Kwon et al. (1994) Plant Physiol. 105:357-67; Yamamoto et al. (1994) Plant Cell Physiol. 35(5):773-778; Gotor et al. (1993) Plant J. 3:509-18; Orozco et al. (1993) Plant Mol. Biol. 23(6):1129-1138; and Matsuoka et al. (1993) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 90(20):9586-9590.
“Seed-preferred” promoters include both “seed-specific” promoters (those promoters active during seed development such as promoters of seed storage proteins) as well as “seed-germinating” promoters (those promoters active during seed germination). See Thompson et al. (1989) BioEssays 10:108, herein incorporated by reference. Such seed-preferred promoters include, but are not limited to, Cim1 (cytokinin-induced message); cZ19B1 (maize 19 kDa zein); milps (myo-inositol-1-phosphate synthase); and celA (cellulose synthase) (see WO 00/11177, herein incorporated by reference). Gama-zein is a preferred endosperm-specific promoter. Glob-1 is a preferred embryo-specific promoter. For dicots, seed-specific promoters include, but are not limited to, bean β-phaseolin, napin, β-conglycinin, soybean lectin, cruciferin, and the like. For monocots, seed-specific promoters include, but are not limited to, maize 15 kDa zein, 22 kDa zein, 27 kDa zein, g-zein, waxy, shrunken 1, shrunken 2, globulin 1, etc. See also WO 00/12733, where seed-preferred promoters from end1 and end2 genes are disclosed; herein incorporated by reference.
The method of transformation/transfection is not critical to the instant invention; various methods of transformation or transfection are currently available. As newer methods are available to transform crops or other host cells they may be directly applied. Accordingly, a wide variety of methods have been developed to insert a DNA sequence into the genome of a host cell to obtain the transcription and/or translation of the sequence to effect phenotypic changes in the organism. Thus, any method, which provides for effective transformation/transfection may be employed.
Transformation protocols as well as protocols for introducing nucleotide sequences into plants may vary depending on the type of plant or plant cell, i.e., monocot or dicot, targeted for transformation. Suitable methods of introducing nucleotide sequences into plant cells and subsequent insertion into the plant genome include microinjection (Crossway et al. (1986) Biotechniques 4:320 334), electroporation (Riggs et al. (1986) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 83:5602 5606, Agrobacterium-mediated transformation (Townsend et al., U.S. Pat. No. 5,563,055; Zhao et al., U.S. Pat. No. 5,981,840), direct gene transfer (Paszkowski et al. (1984) EMBO J. 3:2717 2722), and ballistic particle acceleration (see, for example, Sanford et al., U.S. Pat. No. 4,945,050; Tomes et al., U.S. Pat. No. 5,879,918; Tomes et al., U.S. Pat. No. 5,886,244; Bidney et al., U.S. Pat. No. 5,932,782; McCabe et al. (1988) Biotechnology 6:923 926); and Lec1 transformation (WO 00/28058). Also see Weissinger et al. (1988) Ann. Rev. Genet. 22:421 477; Sanford et al. (1987) Particulate Science and Technology 5:27 37 (onion); Christou et al. (1988) Plant Physiol. 87:671 674 (soybean); McCabe et al. (1988) Bio/Technology 6:923 926 (soybean); Finer and McMullen (1991) In Vitro Cell Dev. Biol. 27P:175-182 (soybean); Singh et al. (1998) Theor. Appl. Genet. 96:319-324 (soybean); Datta et al. (1990) Biotechnology 8:736 740 (rice); Klein et al. (1988) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 85:4305 4309 (maize); Klein et al. (1988) Biotechnology 6:559 563 (maize); Tomes, U.S. Pat. No. 5,240,855; Buising et al., U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,322,783 and 5,324,646; Tomes et al. (1995) “Direct DNA Transfer into Intact Plant Cells via Microprojectile Bombardment,” in Plant Cell, Tissue, and Organ Culture: Fundamental Methods, ed. Gamborg (Springer-Verlag, Berlin) (maize); Klein et al. (1988) Plant Physiol. 91:440 444 (maize); Fromm et al. (1990) Biotechnology 8:833 839 (maize); Hooykaas-Van Slogteren et al. (1984) Nature (London) 311:763-764; Bowen et al., U.S. Pat. No. 5,736,369 (cereals); Bytebier et al. (1987) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 84:5345-5349 (Liliaceae); De Wet et al. (1985) in The Experimental Manipulation of Ovule Tissues, ed. Chapman et al. (Longman, New York), pp. 197-209 (pollen); Kaeppler et al. (1990) Plant Cell Reports 9:415-418 and Kaeppler et al. (1992) Theor. Appl. Genet. 84:560-566 (whisker-mediated transformation); D'Halluin et al. (1992) Plant Cell 4:1495-1505 (electroporation); Li et al. (1993) Plant Cell Reports 12:250-255 and Christou and Ford (1995) Annals of Botany 75:407-413 (rice); Osjoda et al. (1996) Nature Biotechnology 14:745-750 (maize via Agrobacterium tumefaciens); all of which are herein incorporated by reference.
The cells that have been transformed may be grown into plants in accordance with conventional ways. See, for example, McCormick et al. (1986) Plant Cell Reports 5:81-84. These plants may then be grown, and either pollinated with the same transformed strain or different strains, and the resulting progeny having constitutive expression of the desired phenotypic characteristic identified. Two or more generations may be grown to ensure that expression of the desired phenotypic characteristic is stably maintained and inherited and then seeds harvested to ensure that expression of the desired phenotypic characteristic has been achieved.
The present invention may be used for transformation of any plant species, including, but not limited to, monocots and dicots. Examples of plants of interest include, but are not limited to, corn (Zea mays), Brassica sp. (e.g., B. napus, B. rapa, B. juncea), particularly those Brassica species useful as sources of seed oil, alfalfa (Medicago sativa), rice (Oryza sativa), rye (Secale cereale), sorghum (Sorghum bicolor, Sorghum vulgare), millet (e.g., pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum), proso millet (Panicum miliaceum), foxtail millet (Setaria italica), finger millet (Eleusine coracana)), sunflower (Helianthus annuus), safflower (Carthamus tinctorius), wheat (Triticum aestivum), soybean (Glycine max), tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum), potato (Solanum tuberosum), peanuts (Arachis hypogaea), cotton (Gossypium barbadense, Gossypium hirsutum), sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas), cassava (Manihot esculenta), coffee (Coffea spp.), coconut (Cocos nucifera), pineapple (Ananas comosus), citrus trees (Citrus spp.), cocoa (Theobroma cacao), tea (Camellia sinensis), banana (Musa spp.), avocado (Persea americana), fig (Ficus casica), guava (Psidium guajava), mango (Mangifera indica), olive (Olea europaea), papaya (Carica papaya), cashew (Anacardium occidentale), macadamia (Macadamia integrifolia), almond (Prunus amygdalus), sugar beets (Beta vulgaris), sugarcane (Saccharum spp.), oats, barley, vegetables, ornamentals, and conifers.
The following examples are offered by way of illustration and not by way of limitation.
To isolate transcripts present in Phakopsora pachyrhizi haustoria we harvested infected soy leaves 6 days post inoculation, homogenized them (4C) in buffer (0.3M Sorbitol, 20 mM MOPS, 0.2% PVP, 1 mM, DTT(add fresh), 0.1% BSA, pH 7.2). The homogenate was passed through a 100 um Nytex fliter, then a 25 um Nytex filter. Homogenate was centrifuged (3700 g for 10 mins, 4 C). Resuspend pellet in 3 ml buffer (0.3M Sorbitol, 10 mM MOPS, 0.2% BSA, 1 mM CaCl2, 1 mM MnCl2, 0.2% Protect RNA pH 5.4).
Streptavidin-paramagnetic beads which had been pre-incubated with concanavilin A-biotin were added to the suspended homogenate and incubated on ice with rotation for 30 minutes. Beads were captured with a magnetic stand, washed 1X with suspension buffer and then RNA was extracted from haustoria captured on the beads using a standard trizol extraction method.
Total RNA was quantified and a cDNA library was generated from total RNA using the SMART cDNA library kit and protocols (Clontech®).
We obtained 5′ sequence reads from these clones and identified clones that contained an open reading frame that encoded a protein predicted to have a signal peptide by the SignalP algorithm. Clones with predicted signal peptides were fully sequenced and the predicted protein sequence was blasted against the NCBI non-redundant protein database. Predicted proteins that appeared to have clear homologs in organisms that were not within the order Pucciniales (Uredinales) were removed from the collection.
To isolate candidate phakopsora effector sequences from soy infected with soy rust, we harvested total RNA from three samples using a standard trizol RNA preparation protocol: a soybean plant eight days after inoculation with Phakopsora pachyrhizi, a native soybean plant, and germinating Phakopsora pachyrhizi spores. Messenger RNAs are isolated using the Qiagen® RNeasy isolation kit for total RNA isolation, followed by mRNA isolation and fragment library construction using the Illumina TruSeq RNA sample preparation kit (Illumina, Inc. San Diego, Calif.). In this method, mRNAs are isolated via oligo dT beads, fragmented, and reverse transcribed into cDNA fragments using random primers. The resulting cDNA fragments are end repaired, 3′ A-Tailed, ligated with Illumina TruSeq adapters and amplified using Illumina TruSeq specific primers. PCR products are purified by binding to Ampure XP beads (Beckman Genomics, Danvers, Mass.) and initial library quality is assessed by the Agilent Bioanalyzer DNA 7500 chip. To reduce the presence of abundant cDNAs, the fragment libraries are denatured and reannealed at 68° C. for five hours followed by treatment with Duplex Specific Nuclease (Evrogen, Moscow, Russia) for 25 minutes. Digested libraries are purified with AmpureXP beads (Beckman Coulter Genomics), amplified with Illumina TruSeq primers, and checked for final quality and quantity on the Agilent Bioanalyzer DNA 7500 chip prior to sequencing on the Illumina HiSeq2000.
After Illumina sequencing, reads from the rust-infected soy sample were searched for soy sequences which were subsequently removed. The remaining sequences were assembled into contigs using Velvet and Oasis. This set of contigs represents the Phakopsora pachyrhizi transcriptome.
These contigs were screened for open reading frames. These open reading frames were screened for secretory signal peptides using SignalP, and then blasted (blastn and tblastx) against complete NA and protein databases. ORFS that did not have a signal peptide or returned significant similarity to sequences outside of the order Pucciniales were eliminated. The relative abundance of the remaining sequences was compared to their abundance in germinating spores. If the abundance of the transcript was higher in germinating spores, it was regarded as less likely to be a haustoria-associated effector transcript encoding an effector. The ORFs remaining were considered to be strong candidate effectors.
All publications, patents and patent applications mentioned in the specification are indicative of the level of those skilled in the art to which this invention pertains. All publications, patents and patent applications are herein incorporated by reference to the same extent as if each individual publication, patent, or patent application was specifically and individually indicated to be incorporated by reference.
Although the foregoing invention has been described in some detail by way of illustration and example, for purposes of clarity of understanding, it will be obvious that certain changes and modifications may be practiced within the scope of the appended claims.
This application is a continuation of U.S. Non Provisional Application No. 13/798408 filed Mar. 13, 2013 the contents of which are herein incorporated by reference in their entirety.
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 13798408 | Mar 2013 | US |
| Child | 15219562 | US |
