Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30253736›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2018

Comparative genome analyses reveal sequence features reflecting distinct modes of host-adaptation between dicot and monocot powdery mildew.

Ying Wu, Xianfeng Ma, Zhiyong Pan, Shiv D Kale, Yi Song, Harlan King, Qiong Zhang, Christian Presley, Xiuxin Deng, Cheng-I Wei and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
9.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Virulence Traits and Population Genomics of the Black YeastJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. ThemBio · 2019
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Ying WuInstitute for Bioscience and Biotechnology Research, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 20850, USA.
Xianfeng MaInstitute for Bioscience and Biotechnology Research, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 20850, USA.
Zhiyong PanKey Laboratory of Horticultural Plant Biology (Ministry of Education), Key Laboratory of Horticultural Crop Biology and Genetic Improvement (Central Region, Ministry of Agriculture), College of Horticulture and Forestry Sciences, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan, 430070, China.
Shiv D KaleBiocomplexity Institute, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, 24061, USA.
Yi SongInstitute for Bioscience and Biotechnology Research, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 20850, USA.
Harlan KingInstitute for Bioscience and Biotechnology Research, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 20850, USA.
Qiong ZhangInstitute for Bioscience and Biotechnology Research, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 20850, USA.
Christian PresleyInstitute for Bioscience and Biotechnology Research, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 20850, USA.
Xiuxin DengKey Laboratory of Horticultural Plant Biology (Ministry of Education), Key Laboratory of Horticultural Crop Biology and Genetic Improvement (Central Region, Ministry of Agriculture), College of Horticulture and Forestry Sciences, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan, 430070, China.
Cheng-I WeiCollege of Agriculture & Natural Resources, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 20742, USA. wei@umd.edu.
Shunyuan XiaoInstitute for Bioscience and Biotechnology Research, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 20850, USA. xiao@ibbr.umd.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1348-4879
University of Maryland, College Park · USHuazhong Agricultural University · CNBiocom · USChina Agricultural University · CNHunan Agricultural University · CN

Funding

Institute for bioscience and biotechnology research 2955660Maryland Agricultural Experiment Station 2955310Maryland Agricultural Experiment Station 2956830National Science Foundation IOS-1457033
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPowdery mildew (PM) is one of the most important and widespread plant diseases caused by biotrophic fungi. Notably, while monocot (grass) PM fungi exhibit high-level of host-specialization, many dicot PM fungi display a broad host range. To understand such distinct modes of host-adaptation, we sequenced the genomes of four dicot PM biotypes belonging to Golovinomyces cichoracearum or Oidium neolycopersici.

resultsWe compared genomes of the four dicot PM together with those of Blumeria graminis f.sp. hordei (both DH14 and RACE1 isolates), B. graminis f.sp. tritici, and Erysiphe necator infectious on barley, wheat and grapevine, respectively. We found that despite having a similar gene number (6620-6961), the PM genomes vary from 120 to 222 Mb in size. This high-level of genome size variation is indicative of highly differential transposon activities in the PM genomes. While the total number of genes in any given PM genome is only about half of that in the genomes of closely related ascomycete fungi, most (~ 93%) of the ascomycete core genes (ACGs) can be found in the PM genomes. Yet, 186 ACGs were found absent in at least two of the eight PM genomes, of which 35 are missing in some dicot PM biotypes, but present in the three monocot PM genomes, indicating remarkable, independent and perhaps ongoing gene loss in different PM lineages. Consistent with this, we found that only 4192 (3819 singleton) genes are shared by all the eight PM genomes, the remaining genes are lineage- or biotype-specific. Strikingly, whereas the three monocot PM genomes possess up to 661 genes encoding candidate secreted effector proteins (CSEPs) with families containing up to 38 members, all the five dicot PM fungi have only 116-175 genes encoding CSEPs with limited gene amplification.

conclusionsCompared to monocot (grass) PM fungi, dicot PM fungi have a much smaller effectorome. This is consistent with their contrasting modes of host-adaption: while the monocot PM fungi show a high-level of host specialization, which may reflect an advanced host-pathogen arms race, the dicot PM fungi tend to practice polyphagy, which might have lessened selective pressure for escalating an with a particular host.

Indexed as

Genome, FungalAdaptation, PhysiologicalAscomycotaGene DeletionGene Expression ProfilingGenes, FungalGenome SizeHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHost SpecificityMyceliumMycological Typing TechniquesPlant DiseasesPoaceaeEffectorsGene conservationGene lossGenome comparisonHost adaptationHost-pathogen arms racePowdery mildew

Identifiers

PMID30253736
PMCPMC6156980
OpenAlexW2892704997

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.