Welcome to Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops,

Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops >

2022 , Vol. 43 >Issue 4: 853 - 861

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2022.04.021

Plant Protection & Bio-safety

Resistance Mechanism of Cassava Cultivars to Tetranychus urticae Based on Gene Expression Characteristics of Cyanogenic Glycoside Degradation Pathway

  • WU Mufeng 1, 2, 3 ,
  • LIANG Xiao , 2, 3, * ,
  • CHEN Qing , 2, 3, * ,
  • WU Chunling 2, 3 ,
  • LIU Ying 2, 3 ,
  • LIU Xiaoqiang 2, 3 ,
  • HAN Zhiling 1, 2, 3
Expand
  • 1. College of Plant Protection, Hainan University, Haikou, Hainan 570228, China
  • 2. Environment and Plant Protection Institute, China Academy of Tropical Agricultural Sciences / Key Laboratory of Pests Comprehensive Governance for Tropical Crops, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs / Hainan Engineering Research Center for Biological Control of Tropical Crops Diseases and Insect Pests, Haikou, Hainan 571101, China
  • 3. Hainan Key Laboratory for Biosafety Monitoring and Molecular Breeding in Off-Season Reproduction Regions, Sanya, Hainan 572000, China
*LIANG Xiao,E-mail： ;
CHEN Qing,E-mail： 。

Received date: 2021-11-22

  Revised date: 2021-12-24

  Online published: 2022-04-24

Fold

Abstract

In order to explore the resistance mechanism of cassava varieties based on the gene expression characteristics of cyanogen glycoside degradation pathway to Tetranychus urticae, this study used mite-resistant cassava cultivars ‘C1115’ ‘Myanmar’ ‘SC9’ and mite-susceptible cassava cultivars ‘SC205’ ‘Mianbao’ ‘BRA900’ as materials to analyze the cyanogen glycoside degradation pathway genes related to plant insect resistance and the biochemical enzymes changes in the leaves of different parts (top, middle and bottom) when those mites fed for 1 d and 4 d, respectively. The results showed that the expression of α-HNL in the top and middle leaves of mite-susceptible cassava varieties decreased significantly with the extension of the mite infestation time. In the leaves of different parts of mite-resistant cassava varieties, the expression level of α-HNL increased significantly with the extension of the mite infestation time, and the increasing trend was more significant in the middle and bottom leaves. The expression of β-glu in the leaves of different parts of the mite-resistant cassava varieties was very low. It is difficult to compare the changes in the expression level of this gene after different cassava varieties and different parts of the leaves are damaged by mites, but it is not detectable. Among a small number of samples, the proportion of mite-resistant cassava varieties was more than that of mite-susceptible cassava varieties. The results of further enzyme activity analysis showed that after the mite-resistant cassava varieties were infested by mites, as time passed, the enzyme activity of α-HNL encoded by the degradation pathway gene α-HNL showed a tendency to gradually increase or remain unchanged, and the rising trend of the middle and bottom blades was more significant. In the mite-susceptible cassava varieties, with the extension of the mite infestation time, the enzyme activity of α-HNL showed a trend of gradual decrease or first increase and then decrease. The β-GLU enzyme activity encoded by the β-glu gene showed low levels in different cassava varieties, which may be related to the low expression of the corresponding encoded gene. But overall, the degrading enzymes α-HNL and β-GLU encoded by the two genes of the degradation pathway in different leaf tissues of mite-resistant cassava were also significantly higher than that of mite-susceptible cassava. This study initially revealed that cyanogenic glycoside degradation genes and enzymes may be related to the resistance of cassava to Tetranychus urticae after different cassava varieties were infested by mites for different periods of time.

Key words： cyanogenic glycoside; Tetranychus urticae; mite-resistant and mite-susceptible cassava cultivars; degradation pathway; gene expression

Cite this article

WU Mufeng , LIANG Xiao , CHEN Qing , WU Chunling , LIU Ying , LIU Xiaoqiang , HAN Zhiling . Resistance Mechanism of Cassava Cultivars to Tetranychus urticae Based on Gene Expression Characteristics of Cyanogenic Glycoside Degradation Pathway[J]. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2022 , 43(4) : 853 -861 . DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2561.2022.04.021

木薯（Manihot esculenta Crantz）是重要的粮食作物和工业原料,是仅次于水稻、玉米、甘蔗、甘薯的第五大作物[1],也是我国重要的救荒作物和能源作物[2-3]。二斑叶螨（Tetranychus urticae Koch）是重要的世界危险性害螨,寄主十分广泛[4-5],目前已成为为害木薯最严重的有害生物之一,不易药剂防治。培育和利用抗虫品种是国内外公认的防治二斑叶螨最有效、简便和经济的防治措施。
植物中具有抗虫功能的次生代谢物质的创新利用是培育抗虫品种的有效途径[6-7]。次生代谢物质可以抑制害虫取食,降低害虫产卵率,还可以引诱天敌,在植物抵御害虫为害时发挥重要作用[8]。生氰糖苷作为重要次生代谢物质,广泛存在于大约12 000种植物之中,如木薯、高粱、利马豆、杏仁等[9]。在植物组织中,生氰糖苷本身并不具有毒性,但当生氰植物组织被破坏,存在于不同组织的生氰糖苷和降解酶彼此接触发生水解反应,才能释放出有毒的氢氰酸[10-11]。生氰糖苷的降解由β-glu和α-HNL基因控制（图1）,分别编码β-葡萄糖苷酶和羟基腈裂解酶[12]。研究表明,生氰糖苷及其降解途径基因α-HNL和β-glu在植物防御虫害方面发挥重要作用[13],其抗虫功能已在利马豆对草地贪夜蛾[14]、水稻对稻飞虱[15]和花生对蚜虫[16]的防御研究以及生氰糖苷与害虫相互作用的研究中有所体现。
图1 生氰糖苷降解途径[10]

Fig. 1 Cyanogenic glycoside degradation pathway[10]

木薯是典型的生氰作物,其生氰糖苷以亚麻苦苷和百脉根苷2种形式存在,分别占体内总量的95%~97%和3%~5%[17-18]。生氰糖苷能否发挥抗虫功能,除了含量高低以外,还取决于其降解释放出有毒的氢氰酸的能力大小,而α-HNL和β-glu基因的表达水平反映了这种能力,且与作物对害虫的抗性水平密切相关[14⇓-16]。然而,当前尚无研究表明不同木薯品种对二斑叶螨的抗性差异与其为害后木薯叶片中生氰糖苷降解途径基因的表达特性差异有关。鉴于此,本研究拟分析二斑叶螨取食不同抗性水平的木薯品种后,不同叶组织生氰糖苷降解途径基因表达量及其编码的酶活性的变化规律,以初步阐明生氰糖苷降解途径基因表达影响木薯对二斑叶螨的抗性机制,为充分发挥固有次生代谢物质在作物抗虫中的作用,为木薯抗虫种质的挖掘及创新利用奠定理论和材料基础。

1 材料与方法

1.1 材料

1.1.1 供试木薯

遗传稳定的抗螨木薯品种‘C1115’‘缅甸’和‘SC9’,以及感螨木薯品种‘SC205’‘面包’和‘BRA900’[19]均由农业农村部国家木薯种质资源圃提供。

1.1.2 供试二斑叶螨

二斑叶螨为农业农村部热带作物有害生物综合治理重点实验室在室内以豇豆长期继代饲养的试验种群。饲养条件为：温度(28±2)℃,相对湿度为75%±5%,光照为L∶D=16 h∶8 h。选择发育历期相同、大小一致的雌成螨进行后续试验。

1.1.3 试剂

RNA提取试剂盒购自TIANGEN公司（中国）,cDNA合成试剂盒、荧光定量PCR试剂盒均购自上海吐露港生物科技有限公司,用于生氰糖苷降解酶活性测定的酶联免疫分析试剂盒购自于Mlbio公司（中国）。

1.2 方法

1.2.1 二斑叶螨的接种与样品采集

分别选取室内种植3个月,长势一致,健康的抗螨木薯品种‘C1115’‘缅甸’和‘SC9’,以及感螨品种‘SC205’‘面包’和‘BRA900’。每株木薯分别选取对应的上、中、下3个不同部位的3张叶片。挑选发育一致的二斑叶螨雌成螨,按50头/叶的数量接种于叶背,以羊毛脂涂抹在叶柄基部防止二斑叶螨逃逸。采集未受螨害的健康植株叶片（0 d）、螨害1、4 d后不同部位的叶片样品用于RNA和酶液提取。每个木薯品种的不同取样部位、不同螨害时间均设置3个生物学重复。

1.2.2 生氰糖苷降解途径基因转录水平分析

提取不同螨害时间、不同部位叶片的RNA,用1%琼脂糖凝胶电泳和超微量紫外分光光度计（Thermo）检测RNA的完整性和纯度。取1.0 μg经gDNA Eraser（TOLOBIO公司）去除gDNA后的RNA样品用于cDNA合成。以木薯的Meactin基因作为内参[20],相关基因的引物序列信息如表1所示。qPCR反应条件如下：95℃预变性30 s之后,循环反应采用40个循环：95℃变性10 s、60℃退火30 s,溶解曲线采集程序使用仪器默认的方法进行。
表1 木薯生氰糖苷降解途径基因qPCR分析的引物信息

Tab. 1 qPCR primers for transcription analysis of degradation pathway genes in cassava

引物Primer 基因登录号Gene ID 序列（5'-3'）Sequence (5'-3') 退火温度Tm/℃ 产物大小Product size/bp
β-glu-F X94986.1 ATTTGCCTATGATGATGGAG 62.2 202
β-glu-R ATAAGGTTCAGTGGCCGAGT 61.6
α-HNL-F Z29091.1 ACACCGTTCATAGCCCATCT 55.4 235
α-HNL-R ATCCCTTCCTCATTACCATTTT 52.1
Actin-F XM_021777064.2 GAAGTCCTGTTCCAACCATCT 54.4 154
Actin-R AACCACCGCTAAGCACTATGT 56.4

1.2.3 生氰糖苷降解途径关键酶的活性测定

生氰糖苷降解途径关键酶α-HNL、β-GLU的活性测定方法参照上海Mlbio公司的植物α-HNL、β-GLU活性酶联免疫试剂盒的说明书（ https://www.mlbio.cn/）。

1.3 数据处理

采用统计学软件DPS（V15.10）对不同植株部位受螨害不同时间后生氰糖苷降解途径基因表达量的差异进行方差分析和多重比较,首先对原始数据的方差齐性进行检验,若方差齐性则采用Duncan’s新复极差法方法进行多重比较;若方差不齐则对数据进行反正弦平方根转换,并采用Dunnett’s T3方法进行数据间的多重比较（P=0.05）。

2 结果与分析

2.1 抗、感螨木薯品种受螨害后生氰糖苷降解途径基因α-HNL的表达差异分析

与螨害前相比,抗、感螨木薯品种不同部位叶片受螨害不同时间后,生氰糖苷降解途径基因α-HNL的表达量表现出截然不同的变化趋势。在上部叶片中,感螨木薯‘BRA900’中的α-HNL表达量随螨害时间延长逐渐降低,抗螨木薯‘C1115’中则随螨害时间延长逐渐升高,而感螨木薯‘SC205’‘面包’和抗螨木薯‘缅甸’‘SC9’中的表达量均呈先显著升高后降低到为害前水平的趋势（P<0.05）,并且在抗螨木薯中受螨害后的α-HNL表达量相对螨害前的提高幅度高于感螨木薯（图2A）。在中部叶片中,3个感螨木薯品种‘BRA900’‘SC205’‘面包’的α-HNL表达量均随螨害时间的延长显著降低,而在3个抗螨木薯品种‘C1115’‘缅甸’和‘SC9’中的表达量均随螨害时间的延长而显著提高（P<0.05）（图2B）。在下部叶片中,α-HNL在所有抗、感螨木薯品种中的表达量均随螨害时间的延长而显著提高（P<0.05）,并且在3个抗螨木薯品种中的提高幅度大于感螨木薯品种（图2C）。
图2 抗、感木薯品种不同部位叶片受螨害不同时间后α-HNL的相对表达量

A：上部叶片;B：中部叶片;C：下部叶片。每个品种螨害前的α-HNL表达量定义为1.0。不同小写字母表示螨害不同时间后表达量与螨害前差异显著（P<0.05）。

Fig. 2 Relative expression of α-HNL in different leaves canopy of mite-resistant and mite-susceptible cassava cultivars after mite infested at different time

A: Upper canopy leaves; B: Middle canopy leaves; C: Lower canopy leaves. The expression of α-HNL before infested by mites of each cultivar is defined as 1.0. Different lowercase letters indicate that the expression amount after different time of mite infested is significant difference from that before mite infested (P<0.05).

2.2 抗、感螨木薯品种受螨害后生氰糖苷降解途径基因β-glu的表达差异分析

对于另一个生氰糖苷降解途径基因β-glu而言,当以1.0 μg的RNA反转录的cDNA原液为模板（2 μL模板量,20 μL的反应体系）时,绝大多数样品中该基因的荧光信号值仍然很低（CT>35）,仅有个别样品能被检测到,难以比较抗、感木薯品种不同植株部位样品受螨害不同时间后该基因表达量的变化情况。但在能检测到信号的少量样品中,抗螨木薯品种的占比高于感螨木薯品种（图3）。
图3 抗、感木薯品种受螨害不同时间后β-glu的PCR产物电泳

Fig. 3 Gel electrophoresis of PCR products of β-glu in mite-resistant and mite-susceptible cassava cultivars after mite infested at different time

2.3 抗、感螨木薯品种受螨害后生氰糖苷降解酶α-HNL的活性差异分析

与螨害前相比,抗螨木薯品种受螨害后,不同部位叶片的α-HNL酶活性总体上表现出升高或维持不变的趋势（‘C1115’‘SC9’的中部叶片除外）,而感螨木薯品种不同部位叶片的α-HNL酶活性呈逐渐降低的趋势（‘BRA900’‘面包’的上部叶片除外）,这与螨害前后α-HNL基因表达量的变化趋势并不完全一致。此外,对于相同植株部位,相同的螨害时间处理,抗螨木薯品种的α-HNL酶活性总体上显著高于感螨木薯品种（P<0.05）（表2）。
表2 抗、感木薯品种不同部位叶片受螨害后α-HNL酶活性

Tab. 2 α-HNL enzyme activity in leaves at different canopy of mite-resistant and mite-susceptible cassava cultivars after infested by mites IU/L

部位
Canopy		 时间
Time		 感螨品种Mite-susceptible cultivar 抗螨品种Mite-resistant cultivar
BRA900 SC205 面包Mianbao C1115 缅甸Myanmar SC9
上部 0 d 10.29±1.00Cb 14.27±1.35Bb 3.73±1.30Dc 23.46±4.34Aa 12.76±0.77BCb 12.06±1.27BCb
1 d 14.77±1.23BCa 21.61±2.91Aa 10.96±4.58Db 17.65±3.99Bab 4.14±0.73Ec 12.62±0.17CDb
4 d 16.57±2.59Ba 17.93±3.29Bb 10.11±1.59Ca 14.88±1.97Ba 15.17±1.47Ba 22.20±0.78Aa
中部 0 d 9.76±1.58Cb 16.10±1.14Ca 14.48±0.71Ca 78.14±12.56Aa 23.00±3.56Bb 30.50±1.87Ba
1 d 15.81±0.63Da 16.01±1.57Da 1.69±0.62Eb 21.38±3.29Cc 33.13±0.19Aa 25.28±0.41Bb
4 d 14.40±1.18Cb 18.24±1.25Ca 2.38±0.70Db 58.20±9.46Ab 34.37±3.56Ba 20.47±0.70Cc
下部 0 d 5.06±0.21DEc 21.84±0.72Ba 3.88±2.19Eb 18.78±1.29Cab 7.18±2.00Dc 25.48±3.15Ab
1 d 10.03±0.70Da 16.45±0.11Cb 8.76±1.35Da 21.81±1.04Ba 28.38±3.73Ab 27.45±1.37Ab
4 d 6.22±0.56Cb 18.47±3.69Bb 3.59±1.10Cb 15.89±3.41Bb 35.40±1.57Aa 36.38±2.88Aa

注：同列不同小写字母表示相同品种相同部位不同时间差异显著（P<0.05）,同行不同大写字母表示相同时间不同品种差异显著（P<0.05）。

Note: Different lowercases in the same column indicate significant difference among the same canopy of same cultivars at different time (P<0.05), different capital letters in the same line indicate significant difference in different varieties at the same time (P<0.05).

2.4 抗、感螨木薯品种受螨害后生氰糖苷降解酶β-GLU的活性差异分析

与螨害前相比,抗螨木薯品种‘C1115’受螨害后,不同部位叶片的β-GLU酶活性均呈显著提高的趋势,而抗螨木薯品种‘缅甸’和‘SC9’的β-GLU酶活性则呈先比螨害前显著提高（1 d）后又恢复到螨害前水平的趋势（4 d）。感螨木薯品种‘SC205’的β-GLU酶活性在螨害后显著降低,而感螨木薯品种‘BRA900’和‘面包’的β-GLU酶活性则呈先比螨害前显著提高（1 d）后又显著低于螨害前水平的趋势（4 d）（P<0.05）。此外,对于相同植株部位,相同的螨害时间处理,抗螨木薯品种的β-GLU酶活性总体上显著高于感螨木薯品种（表3）。
表3 抗、感木薯品种不同部位叶片受螨害后β-GLU酶活性

Tab. 3 β-GLU enzyme activity in leaves at different canopy of mite-resistant and mite-susceptible cassava cultivars after infested by mites IU/L

部位Canopy 时间Time 感螨品种Mite-susceptible cultivar 抗螨品种Mite-resistant cultivar
BRA900 SC205 面包Mianbao C1115 缅甸Myanmar SC9
上部 0 d 4.01±0.35EB 35.70±0.35Aa 7.78±0.55Db 20.78±1.54Bb 7.95±1.91Db 10.86±0.42Cb
1 d 7.08±0.82EA 23.14±0.71Ac 10.91±0.69Da 17.88±2.49Bb 13.78±0.84Ca 17.17±1.57Ba
4 d 3.20±0.79EB 26.84±1.05Bb 5.68±0.38Dc 29.40±0.49Aa 10.05±1.08Cb 10.64±0.90Cb
中部 0 d 5.33±0.27EB 36.87±0.12Aa 8.73±0.62Db 18.03±3.04Bb 12.07±0.49Cb 11.16±0.45Cb
1 d 9.10±0.48DA 23.40±2.84Ab 10.88±0.25Da 19.23±2.98Bb 14.92±0.45Ca 18.19±0.07Ba
4 d 4.04±0.27FC 21.50±1.38Bb 5.34±1.36Ec 38.50±0.94Aa 8.60±0.71Dc 11.24±0.56Cb
下部 0 d 6.06±0.18DB 34.92±2.07Aa 9.17±0.19CDb 18.92±1.35Bb 12.48±1.24Cb 9.18±0.93CDb
1 d 9.77±0.35CA 24.83±1.81Ab 10.55±0.50Ca 18.59±1.97Bb 17.43±1.00Ba 16.74±0.21Ba
4 d 4.77±1.14DC 25.64±1.39Bb 5.00±0.42Dc 32.16±2.10Aa 9.96±0.62Cc 8.34±0.42Cb

注：同列不同小写字母表示相同品种相同部位不同时间差异显著（P<0.05）,同行不同大写字母表示相同时间不同品种差异显著（P<0.05）。

Note: Different lowercases in the same column indicate significant difference among the same canopy of same cultivars at different time (P<0.05), different capital letters in the same line indicate significant difference in different varieties at the same time (P<0.05).

3 讨论

生氰糖苷能否发挥抗虫功能,除了含量高低以外,还取决于其降解释放出有毒的氢氰酸的能力大小,而生氰糖苷降解途径基因α-HNL和β-glu在生氰糖苷对害虫的致毒过程中发挥重要作用[14⇓-16]。氢氰酸是一种强力的呼吸抑制剂和酶抑制剂[21-22],能够对害虫产生毒害作用,从而发挥作物的抗虫功能[23]。许多植物也在长期的进化过程中产生了生氰物质[23-24]。例如ZAGROBELNY等[23,25]研究植物-昆虫互作时发现,生氰糖苷在β-GLU酶催化下导致氰醇、酮化合物或醛、HCN、β-氰基丙氨酸、硫氰酸盐和亚硫酸盐的积累,而上述化合物均与作物抗虫性相关。CAIRNS等[24]发现三叶草当中的亚麻苦苷（linamarin）、高粱中的蜀黍苷（dhurrin）和樱桃以及其他核果中的野黑樱苷（prunasin）能够被α-HNL酶降解为有毒的氰化物,从而对害虫产生毒害作用。丁梅等[26]在研究橡胶树α-HNL基因时发现,橡胶树被病虫害侵染后,体内的α-HNL基因表达量显著提升,而α-HNL基因在橡胶树不同组织中的表达量有所不同,其中在初生乳胶中的表达量远远高于次生乳胶,在幼嫩叶片中也高于成熟叶片[27]。本研究结果表明,生氰糖苷降解基因α-HNL在感螨木薯品种上部和中部叶片中的表达量随螨害时间的延长显著降低,而在抗螨木薯品种中则显著提高,结合前人的研究,推测二斑叶螨与木薯长期的协同进化过程中,某些产生HCN能力较弱的木薯品种已经被二斑叶螨所适应,成为其适宜寄主,而某些木薯品种,可能因其产生对害虫有毒的HCN水平高,二斑叶螨不喜取食,成为其非适宜寄主,对二斑叶螨具有良好的抗性。
次生代谢物质在植物中的含量具有组织特异性差异。董学奎[28]研究水稻苯丙烷代谢物的时空分布时发现,水稻类黄酮物质在叶中的含量最高,其次是茎秆、穗子与种子,而根中类黄酮物质含量最低。刘亚军[29]在进行茶树酯型儿茶素合成途径及酚类物质积累特异性研究时发现,同器官中酚类物质组分及含量差异较大。在鲜叶和茎中的儿茶素、黄酮醇、酚酸含量较高。在木薯中,同样存在生氰糖苷的组织特异性差异。例如周新成等[30]采用高效液相色谱法分析木薯品种‘ARG7’‘KU50’和‘W14’的生氰糖苷含量时发现,3个品种叶片中生氰糖苷含量均达到块根中的数倍以上。另有研究指出,α-HNL酶主要存在于木薯叶片中,在块根中含量极少,甚至检测不到[31]。此外,还可以通过转基因手段调控次生代谢物质在植物体内的分布状况。例如郭海霞等[32]研究发现糖苷生物碱在抵御病菌和害虫侵袭方面有重要的作用,并且可以通过分子方法促进马铃薯地上部分糖苷生物碱（SGAs）的积累,提高其抗逆性和品质。SIRITUNGA等[33-34]在木薯叶片中特异表达生氰糖苷合成基因的反义片段,最终获得叶片和块根生氰糖苷含量分别降低94%和99%的转基因后代。JØRGENSEN等[35]对生氰糖苷合成基因进行RNA干涉,也获得了木薯块根氰苷含量极显著降低的转基因植株。NARAYANAN等[8]用块根特异性启动子patatin启动HNL过量表达,获得的转基因块根在其加工过程中可加速HCN的挥发,从而降低了木薯食品由于处理不完全而残留氰化物对人体造成的危害。本研究发现,受二斑叶螨为害后,α-HNL和β-glu的表达量及其酶活力在抗螨木薯品种不同部位叶片呈逐渐升高或维持不变的趋势,而在感螨木薯品种不同部位叶片中,α-HNL和β-glu处于显著被抑制或不能激活诱导的状态,推测抗螨木薯品种可能具有更强的对害螨释放有害HCN的能力。
基因转录水平的变化趋势并不一定与蛋白水平的变化趋势一致。基因mRNA转录水平增加,而蛋白表达量减少,或者二者趋势相反的案例已有较多报道[36⇓⇓-39]。有研究指出,蛋白质组和转录组学在分析中会存在差异[40⇓-42],例如MAIER等[39]在研究中发现,单个蛋白质的半衰期是高度可变的,这种蛋白质半衰期的差异已经被证明是转录组和蛋白质组结果之间存在分歧的原因,因此,转录组水平并不总与蛋白组水平一致,且蛋白水平分析比转录水平更能体现出植物体的相关功能变化[43]。本研究结果表明,抗螨木薯品种受螨害后,不同部位叶片的α-HNL酶活性总体呈升高或维持不变的趋势,而感螨木薯品种的酶活性总体上呈逐渐降低的趋势,这与抗螨木薯品种α-HNL表达量逐渐升高趋势略有区别。而β-glu基因表达量很低,也导致其编码的β-GLU酶活性也较低（实际检测时酶液用量提高3倍才能保障酶活在试剂盒的检测限内）,总体而言,在不同植株部位上,抗螨木薯品种的β-GLU酶活性总体显著高于感螨木薯品种。上述结果从酶学水平进一步印证了我们的推断,即抗螨木薯品种具有更强的降解和释放有毒的氢氰酸抵御螨害的能力。
本研究仅从生氰糖苷降解途径基因转录水平和酶活性水平层面初步阐述了木薯对二斑叶螨的抗性机制,而二斑叶螨为害前后,不同抗螨木薯品种的生氰糖苷含量,以及氢氰酸释放量的差异尚未进行测定,其与基因表达和酶活性水平是否具有一致性,及其与木薯品种对二斑叶螨抗性的相关性尚不清楚,上述疑问仍需后续试验进一步探究。

References

Publishing order | Descend order by publishing year | Descend order by cited within
[1]
欧文军, 韦卓文, 梁海波, 夏秀云, 李开绵. 推动中非木薯科技合作服务国家“一带一路”战略[J]. 中国热带农业, 2016,4(4): 9-12.

OU W J, WEI Z W, LIANG H B, XIA X Y, LI K M. Promote China-Africa cooperation in cassava technology to serve the country’s “The Belt and Road” strategy[J]. China Tropical Agriculture, 2016,4(4): 9-12. (in Chinese)

[2]
张哲, 陈青, 梁晓, 伍春玲, 陈谦, 张银东. 朱砂叶螨为害前后抗、感木薯品种叶组织营养物质含量差异分析[J]. 热带作物学报, 2020,41(9): 1865-1869.

ZHANG Z, CHEN Q, LIANG X, WU C L, CHEN Q, ZHANG Y D. Analysis on difference of nutrient content in leaf tissue of resistant and sensitive cassava varieties before and after damage to Tetranychus cinnabarinus[J]. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2020,41(9): 1865-1869. (in Chinese)

[3]
HU W, JI C, SHI H, LIANG Z, DING Z H, YE J Q, OU W J, ZHOU G, TIE W W, YAN Y, YANG J H, YANG X Y, WEI Y X, JIN Z Q, XIE J H, PENG M, WANG W Q, GUO A P, XU B Y, GUO J C, CHEN S B, MA L M, WANG M C, ZHOU Y, LI X L, LI R X, GUO S Y, XIAO X H, WAN Z Q, AN F F, ZHANG J, LENG Q Y, LI Y, MING R, LI K M. Allele-defined genome reveals biallelic differentiation during cassava evolution[J]. Molecular Plant, 2021,14(6): 851-854.

DOI

[4]
金晶, 杨顺义, 尚素琴, 叶调琴. 苦参碱对二斑叶螨解毒酶活力的影响[J]. 草原与草坪, 2020,40(6): 89-94.

JIN J, YANG S Y, SHANG S Q, YE T Q. Effects of matrine on the detoxification enzyme activity of Tetranychus urticae[J]. Grassland and Turf, 2020,40(6): 89-94. (in Chines)

[5]
张文辉, 刘光杰. 植物抗虫性次生物质的研究概况[J]. 植物学通报, 2003(5): 522-530.

ZHANG W H, LIU G J. A review on plant secondary substances in plant resistance to insect pests[J]. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 2003(5): 522-530. (in Chinese)

[6]
MITHÖFER A, BOLAND W. Plant defense against herbivores: Chemical aspects[J]. Annual Review of Plant Biology, 2012,63: 431-450.

DOI

[7]
WAR A R, PAULRAJ M G, AHMAD T, BUHROO A A, HUSSAIN B, IGNACIMUTHU S, SHARMA H C. Mechanisms of plant defense against insect herbivores[J]. Plant Signaling & Behavior, 2012,7: 1306-1320.

[8]
NARAYANAN N N, IHEMERE U, ELLERY C, SAYRE R T. Overexpression of hydroxynitrile lyase in cassava roots elevates protein and free amino acids while reducing residual cyanogen levels[J]. PLoS One, 2011,6(7): e21996.

DOI

[9]
沈培峰, 付莉莉, 孙雪飘, 张家明. 木薯Linamarase基因的克隆、表达及酶学特性分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2012,28(12): 164-168.

SHEN P F, FU L L, SUN X P, ZHANG J M. Cloning, expression of Linamarasein cassava and characterization of its recombinant protein activity[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2012,28(12): 164-168. (in Chinese)

[10]
JORGENSEN K, MORANT A V, MORANT M, JENSEN N B, OLSEN C E, KANNANGARA R, MOTAWIA M S, MØLLER B L, BAK S. Biosynthesis of the cyanogenic glucosides linamarin and lotaustralin in cassava: Isolation, biochemical characterization, and expression pattern of CYP71E7, the oxime-metabolizing cytochrome P450 enzyme[J]. Plant Physiology, 2011,155(1): 282-292.

DOI

[11]
CUTLER A J, CONN E E. The biosynthesis of cyanogenic glucosides in Linum usitatissimum (linen flax) in vitro[J]. Archives of Biochemistry & Biophysics, 1981,212(2): 468-474.

[12]
柳春梅, 吕鹤书. 生氰糖苷类物质的结构和代谢途径研究进展[J]. 天然产物研究与开发, 2014,26(2): 294-299.

LIU C M, LV H S. Advances in research on chemical constituents and metabolic pathways of cyanogentic glycosides[J]. Natural Product Research and Development, 2014,26(2): 294-299. (in Chinese)

[13]
YULVIANTI M, ZIDORN C. Chemical diversity of plant cyanogenic glycosides: An overview of reported natural products[J]. Molecules, 2021,26(3): 719.

DOI

[14]
CUNY M A C, FORGIA D L, DESURMONT G A, GLAUSER G, BENREY B. Role of cyanogenic glycosides in the seeds of wild lima bean, Phaseolus lunatus: Defense, plant nutrition or both?[J]. Planta, 2019,250(4): 1281-1292.

DOI

[15]
DAI Z Y, TAN J, ZHOU C, YANG X F, YANG F, ZHANG S J, SUN S C, MIAO X M, SHI Z Y. The OsmiR396-OsGRF8-OsF3H-flavonoid pathway mediates resistance to the brown planthopper in rice (Oryza sativa)[J]. Plant Biotechnology Journal, 2019,17(8): 1657.

DOI

[16]
WAR A R, SHARMA S P, SHARMA H C. Differential induction of flavonoids in groundnut in response to Helicoverpa armigera and Aphis craccivora infestation[J]. International Journal of Insect Science, 2016,8(8): 56-64.

[17]
SANTANA M A, VÁSQUEZ V, ALDAO M R R. Linamarase expression in cassava cultivars with roots of low-and high-cyanide content[J]. Plant Physiology, 2002,129(4): 1686-1694.

DOI

[18]
付莉莉, 沈培峰, 谭德冠, 张家明. 高氰和低氰木薯生氰葡萄糖苷酶Linamarase基因的组织表达差异分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2016(11): 22-26.

FU L L, SHEN P F, TAN D G, ZHANG J M. Differential expression of Linamarase gene in cassava cultivars with low cyanide content and high cyanide content[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2016(11): 22-26. (in Chinese)

[19]
陈青, 梁晓, 伍春玲, 刘迎. 木薯抗螨种质资源挖掘与创新利用研究进展[C]// 2019年全国热带作物学术年会论文集, 2019: 337.

CHEN Q, LIANG X, WU C L, LIU Y. Research progress on mining and innovative utilization of anti-mite germplasm resources of cassava[C]// The 2019 National Tropical Crops Academic Conference, 2019: 337. (in Chinese)

[20]
LU F, LIANG X, LU H, LI Q, CHEN Q, ZHANG P, LI K M, LIU G H, YAN W, SONG J M, DUAN C F, ZHANG L H. Overproduction of superoxide dismutase and catalase confers cassava resistance to Tetranychus cinnabarinus[J]. Scientific Reports, 2017,7: 40179.

DOI

[21]
SIRITUNGA D, ARIAS-GARZON D, WHITE W, RICHARD T. Over-expression of hydroxynitrile lyase in transgenic cassava roots accelerates cyanogenesis and food detoxification[J]. Plant Biotechnology Journal, 2004,2: 37-43.

DOI

[22]
孙兰萍, 许晖. 亚麻籽生氰糖苷的研究进展[J]. 中国油脂, 2007,32(10): 24-27.

SUN L P, XU H. Research progress on flaxseed cyanogenetic glycoside[J]. China Oils and Fats, 2007,32(10): 24-27. (in Chinese)

[23]
ZAGROBELNY M, BAK S, RASMUSSEN A V, JØRGENSEN B, NAUMANN C M, LINDBERG M B. Cyanogenic glucosides and plant-insect interactions[J]. Phytochemistry, 2004,65(3): 293-306.

DOI

[24]
CAIRNS J, ESEN A. β-Glucosidases[J]. Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, 2010,67(20): 3389-3405.

DOI

[25]
MORANT A V, JOERGENSEN K, JOERGENSEN C, PAQUETTE S M, SANCHEZ P R, MOELLER B L, BAK S. Cheminform abstract: β-glucosidases as detonators of plant chemical defense[J]. ChemInform, 2008,39: 41.

[26]
丁梅, 吴坤鑫, 谭德冠, 张家明. 橡胶树羟基腈水解酶基因的克隆、表达和基因家族分析[J]. 热带作物学报, 2016,37(11): 2170-2175.

DING M, WU K X, TAN D G, ZHANG J M. Cloning and expression of HbHNL-1 gene with analysis of the gene family in Hevea brasiliensis[J]. Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2016,37(11): 2170-2175. (in Chinese)

[27]
RESCH A, LEICHT S, SARIC M, PÁSZTOR L, JAKOB A, GÖTZ F, NORDHEIM A F. Comparative proteome analysis of Staphylococcus aureus biofilm and planktonic cells and correlation with transcriptome profiling[J]. Proteomics, 2010,6(6): 1867-1877.

DOI

[28]
董学奎. 水稻苯丙烷代谢物时空分布及其自然变异的遗传基础研究[D]. 武汉: 华中农业大学, 2015.

DONG X K. Spatiotemporal accumulation and the natural variation genetic basis of phenylpropanoids in rice[D]. Wuhan: Huazhong Agricultural University, 2015. (in Chinese)

[29]
刘亚军. 茶树酯型儿茶素合成途径及酚类物质积累特异性研究[D]. 合肥: 安徽农业大学, 2011.

LIU Y J. Studies on the biosynthesis pathways of galloylated catechins and specific accumulation of phenolic compounds in tea plant[D]. Hefei: Anhui Agricultural University, 2011. (in Chinese)

[30]
周新成, 陈新, 卢诚, 任军方, 王文泉. 木薯叶片和块根中氰苷的快速提取[J]. 现代农业科技, 2020(24): 214-216+220.

ZHOU X C, CHEN X, LU C, REN J F, WANG W Q. Quick extraction of cyanogenic glycoside from cassava leaves and storage roots[J]. Modern Agricultural Science and Technology, 2020(24): 214-216, 220. (in Chinese)

[31]
邹良平, 起登凤, 李玖慧, 吴晓鹏, 孙建波, 彭明. 高效液相色谱-蒸发光检测法测定木薯生氰糖苷的含量[J]. 中国农学通报, 2014,30(24): 47-51.

ZOU L P, QI D F, LI J H, WU X P, SUN J B, PENG M. Using high performance liquid chromatography (hplc)- evaporative light detector assayfor content determination of cyanogenic glucosides in cassava[J]. Chinese Agriculutral Science Bulletin, 2014,30(24): 47-51. (in Chinese)

[32]
郭海霞, 张晶晶, 安然, 乔岩, 石文慧, 石菁, 张金文. 马铃薯地上部绿色组织中糖苷生物碱合成调控的研究[J]. 园艺学报, 2017,44(6): 1105-1115.

GUO H X, ZHANG J J, AN R, QIAO Y, SHI W H, SHI J, ZHANG J W. Regulation of SGAs biosynthesis of green tissues in aerial part of the potato[J]. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2017,44(6): 1105-1115. (in Chinese)

[33]
SIRITUNGA D, SAYRE R. Engineering cyanogen synthesis and turnover in cassava (Manihot esculenta)[J]. Plant Molecular Biology, 2004,56(4): 661-669.

DOI

[34]
SIRITUNGA D, SAYRE R T. Generation of cyanogen-free transgenic cassava[J]. Planta, 2003,217(3): 367-373.

DOI

[35]
JØRGENSEN K, BAK S, BUSK P K, SØRENSEN C, OLSEN C E, PUONTI-KAERLAS J, MØLLER B L. Cassava plants with a depleted cyanogenic glucoside content in leaves and tubers. Distribution of cyanogenic glucosides, their site of synthesis and transport, and blockage of the biosynthesis by RNA interference technology[J]. Plant Physiology, 2005,139(1): 363-374.

DOI

[36]
HAIDER S, RANADIP P. Integrated analysis of transcriptomic and proteomic data[J]. Current Genomics, 2013,14(2): 91-110.

DOI

[37]
GERASHCHENKO M V, LOBANOV A V, GLADYSHEV V N. Genome-wide ribosome profiling reveals complex translational regulation in response to oxidative stress[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 2012,109(43): 17394-17399.

DOI

[38]
BATHKE J, KONZER A, REMES B, MCINTOSH M, KLUG G. Comparative analyses of the variation of the transcriptome and proteome of Rhodobacter sphaeroides throughout growth[J]. BMC Genomics, 2019,20(1): 1-13.

DOI

[39]
MAIER T, SCHMIDT A, GUELL M, KÜHNER S, GAVIN A C, AEBERSOLD R, SERRANO L. Quantification of mRNA and protein and integration with protein turnover in a bacterium[J]. Molecular Systems Biology, 2014,7(1): 511.

DOI

[40]
ISLAM N, KIM Y, ROSS J M, MARTEN M R. Proteomic analysis of Staphylococcus aureus biofilm cells grown under physiologically relevant fluid shear stress conditions[J]. Proteome Science, 2014,12(1): 21.

DOI

[41]
YI L, WANG Y, MA Z, ZHANG H, LI Y, ZHENG J X, YANG Y C, FAN H J, LU C P. Biofilm formation of Streptococcus equi ssp. zooepidemicus and comparative proteomic analysis of biofilm and planktonic cells[J]. Current Microbiology, 2014,69(3): 227-233.

DOI

[42]
FREIBERG J A, LE BRETON Y, TRAN B Q, SCOTT A J, HARRO J M, ERNST R K, GOO Y A, MONGODIN E F, GOODLETT D R, MCIVER K S, SHIRTLIFF M E. Global analysis and comparison of the transcriptomes and proteomes of group a Streptococcus biofilms[J]. mSystems, 2016,1(6): e00149-16.

[43]
CHEN Q, LIANG X, WU C L, GAO J T, CHEN Q, ZHANG Z. Density threshold-based acaricide application for the two-spotted spider mite Tetranychus urticae on cassava: from laboratory to the field[J]. Pest Management Science, 2019,75: 2634-2641.

DOI

Options
Outlines

/

〈 〉

琼ICP备19001573号
Copyright © Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, All Rights Reserved.
Tel: 0898-66989102　E-mail: rdzx136@163.com
Powered by Beijing Magtech Co. Ltd