Silverleaf Whitefly Induces Salicylic Acid Defenses and Suppresses Effectual Jasmonic Acid Defenses1[W][OA]
By Sonia I. Zarate, L. Kempema, L. Walling. Plant Physiology, 2006
728 citations recorded by the source corpus.
The basal defenses important in curtailing the development of the phloem-feeding silverleaf whitefly (Bemisia tabaci type B; SLWF) on Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) were investigated. Sentinel defense gene RNAs were monitored in SLWF-infested and control plants. Salicylic acid (SA)-responsive gene transcripts accumulated locally (PR1, BGL2, PR5, SID2, EDS5, PAD4) and systemically (PR1, BGL2, PR5) during SLWF nymph feeding. In contrast, jasmonic acid (JA)- and ethylene-dependent RNAs (PDF1.2, VSP1, HEL, THI2.1, FAD3, ERS1, ERF1) were repressed or not modulated in SLWF-infested leaves. To test for a role of SA and JA pathways in basal defense, SLWF development on mutant and transgenic lines that constitutively activate or impair defense pathways was determined. By monitoring the percentage of SLWF nymphs in each instar, we show that mutants that activate SA defenses (cim10) or impair JA defenses (coi1) accelerated SLWF nymphal development. Reciprocally, mutants that activate JA defenses (cev1) or impair SA defenses (npr1, NahG) slowed SLWF nymphal development. Furthermore, when npr1 plants, which do not activate downstream SA defenses, were treated with methyl jasmonate, a dramatic delay in nymph development was observed. Collectively, these results showed that SLWF-repressed, JA-regulated defenses were associated with basal defense to the SLWF.
Subfields: Insect Science, Plant Science
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/cc48dfc6754d8f115f8d7dd300e588084d9ac124
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Insect Science
In Plant Science
- C. Pieterse
- M. Dicke
- Saskia C. M. Van Wees
- C. Zamioudis
- R. Mumm
- Matthias Erb
- T. C. Turlings
- Antonio León-Reyes
Citations in the corpus
- Deciphering Chemical Language of Plant Communication (2016, background): “This manipulation of plant defences has been shown for arthropods belonging to different taxonomic groups with different feeding habits such as phloem feeders (Zarate et al. 2007; Walling 2008; Bos et al. 2010), caterpillars (Musser et al.”
- Variation in natural plant products and the attraction of bodyguards involved in indirect plant defense (2010, background): “In contrast, caterpillarinfested cotton plants simultaneously infested with the whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius, 1889), (inducing the SA pathway and interfering with the JA pathway; Zarate et al. 2007) emit lower amounts of HIPVs than plants infested by only caterpillars (Rodriguez-Saona et al.”
- Costs and benefits of hormone-regulated plant defences (2013, background): “tabaci can rewire the plant’s immune signalling network to their own benefit (Zarate et al., 2007).”
- Avoiding Effective Defenses: Strategies Employed by Phloem-Feeding Insects1 (2008, background): “…Bemisia tabaci biotype B (silverleaf whitefly [SLWF])Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) interaction is a clear example of an insect manipulating plant signaling to suppress effective defenses, increase plant susceptibility, and enhance insect performance (Kempema et al., 2007; Zarate et al., 2007).”
- Hormonal modulation of plant immunity. (2012, background): “On Arabidopsis, they activate the SA signaling pathway, which concomitantly suppresses effective JA-dependent defenses, resulting in increased plant susceptibility and enhanced insect performance (Zarate et al. 2007).”
- Plant immunity to insect herbivores. (2008, background): “tabaci, which causes much less mechanical damage than do aphids, does not activate JA-responsive genes (145).”
- Sequence of arrival determines plant‐mediated interactions between herbivores (2011, background): “…The plant’s salicylic acid (SA) response for example down regulates jasmonic acid (JA) dependent defense genes (Spoel et al. , 2007), which may explain the interference of whiteflies with induced resistance (Zarate et al. , 2007) and bacterial colonization belowground (Yang et al. , this issue).”