Advertisement

Bacillomycin D inhibits growth of Rhizopus stolonifer and induces defense-related mechanism in cherry tomato

  • Fuxing Lin
  • Yingying Xue
  • Zhenghua Huang
  • Mengxi Jiang
  • Fengxia Lu
  • Xiaomei Bie
  • Song Miao
  • Zhaoxin LuEmail author
Applied microbial and cell physiology
  • 5 Downloads

Abstract

The inhibitory effect of Bacillomycin D, a cyclic lipopeptide, on Rhizopus stolonifer colonization of cherry tomato was studied, and its possible mechanism of action was explored. Bacillomycin D showed a direct inhibitory effect on R. stolonifer spore germination and mycelial growth in vitro. It conferred both a direct inhibitory effect on R. stolonifer growth in cherry tomato in vivo and induced host resistance in cherry tomato. Moreover, Bacillomycin D treatment significantly increased the activities of plant defense-related enzymes, including chitinase (CHI), β-1,3-glucanase (GLU), phenylalanine ammonia-lyase (PAL), and peroxidase (POD). Real-time PCR (RT-PCR) showed that defense-related genes involved in the salicylic acid defense signaling pathway and genes encoding pathogenesis-related proteins were up-regulated in Bacillomycin D treatment. Furthermore, Bacillomycin D-C16 resulted in direct inhibition and a remarkable induced resistance to R. stolonifer which was higher than as induced by Bacillomycin D-C14. Together, the data indicated that Bacillomycin D can control the growth of R. stolonifer through both the direct inhibition of the fungus and the activation of defense-related genes and enzymes in cherry tomato.

Keywords

Bacillomycin D Rhizopus stolonifer Cherry tomato Induced resistance Postharvest 

Notes

Funding

This study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 31571887).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Supplementary material

253_2019_9991_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (74 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 74 kb)

References

  1. Banat IM, Franzetti A, Gandolfi I, Bestetti G, Martinotti MG, Fracchia L, Smyth TJ, Marchant R (2010) Microbial biosurfactants production, applications and future potential. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 87(2):427–444Google Scholar
  2. Barreto TA, Andrade SC, Maciel JF, Arcanjo NM, Madruga MS, Meireles B, Cordeiro ÂM, Souza EL, Magnani M (2016) A chitosan coating containing essential oil from Origanum vulgare L. to control postharvest mold infections and keep the quality of cherry tomato fruit. Front Microbiol 7:1724Google Scholar
  3. Bautista-Baños S, Bosquez-Molina E, Barrera-Necha LL (2014) Rhizopus stolonifer (soft rot). In: Bautista-Baños S (ed) Postharvest decay. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 1–44Google Scholar
  4. Brotman Y, Makovitzki A, Shai Y, Chet I, Viterbo A (2009) Synthetic ultrashort cationic lipopeptides induce systemic plant defense responses against bacterial and fungal pathogens. Appl Environ Microbiol 75(16):5373–5379Google Scholar
  5. Dong X (2004) NPR1, all things considered. Curr Opin Plant Biol 7(5):547–552Google Scholar
  6. Eeman M, Berquand A, Dufrene Y, Paquot M, Dufour S, Deleu M (2006) Penetration of surfactin into phospholipid monolayers: nanoscale interfacial organization. Langmuir 22(26):11337–11345Google Scholar
  7. Falardeau J, Wise C, Novitsky L, Avis T (2013) Ecological and mechanistic insights into the direct and indirect antimicrobial properties of Bacillus subtilis lipopeptides on plant pathogens. J Chem Ecol 39(7):869–878Google Scholar
  8. Falk A, Feys BJ, Frost LN, Jones JD, Daniels MJ, Parker JE (1999) EDS1, an essential component of R gene-mediated disease resistance in Arabidopsis has homology to eukaryotic lipases. Proc Natl A Sci 96(6):3292–3297Google Scholar
  9. Guerra ICD, de Oliveira PDL, de Souza Pontes AL, Lúcio ASSC, Tavares JF, Barbosa-Filho JM, Madruga MS, de Souza EL (2015) Coatings comprising chitosan and Mentha piperita L. or Mentha× villosa Huds essential oils to prevent common postharvest mold infections and maintain the quality of cherry tomato fruit. Int J Food Microbiol 214:168–178Google Scholar
  10. Hajare SN, Subramanian M, Gautam S, Sharma A (2013) Induction of apoptosis in human cancer cells by a Bacillus lipopeptide bacillomycin D. Biochimie 95(9):1722–1731Google Scholar
  11. Heerklotz H, Seelig J (2007) Leakage and lysis of lipid membranes induced by the lipopeptide surfactin. Eur Biophys J 36(4-5):305–314Google Scholar
  12. Henry G, Deleu M, Jourdan E, Thonart P, Ongena M (2011) The bacterial lipopeptide surfactin targets the lipid fraction of the plant plasma membrane to trigger immune-related defence responses. Cell Microbiol 13(11):1824–1837Google Scholar
  13. Janisiewicz WJ, Korsten L (2002) Biological control of postharvest diseases of fruits. Annu Rev Phytopathol 40(1):411–441Google Scholar
  14. Jiang F, Chen J, Miao Y, Krupinska K, Zheng X (2009) Identification of differentially expressed genes from cherry tomato fruit (Lycopersicon esculentum) after application of the biological control yeast Cryptococcus laurentii. Postharvest Biol Technol 53(3):131–137Google Scholar
  15. Jourdan E, Henry G, Duby F, Dommes J, Barthelemy J-P, Thonart P, Ongena M (2009) Insights into the defense-related events occurring in plant cells following perception of surfactin-type lipopeptide from Bacillus subtilis. Mol Plant-Microbe Interact 22(4):456–468Google Scholar
  16. Kawagoe Y, Shiraishi S, Kondo H, Yamamoto S, Aoki Y, Suzuki S (2015) Cyclic lipopeptide iturin A structure-dependently induces defense response in Arabidopsis plants by activating SA and JA signaling pathways. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 460(4):1015–1020Google Scholar
  17. Kwon J-H, Kang S-W, Kim J-S, Park C-S (2001) Rhizopus soft rot on cherry tomato caused by Rhizopus stolonifer in Korea. Mycobiology 29(3):176–178Google Scholar
  18. Lai J, Cao X, Yu T, Wang Q, Zhang Y, Zheng X, Lu H (2018) Effect of Cryptococcus laurentii on inducing disease resistance in cherry tomato fruit with focus on the expression of defense-related genes. Food Chem 254:208–216Google Scholar
  19. Lee DW, Kim BS (2015) Antimicrobial cyclic peptides for plant disease control. Plant Pathol J 31(1):1–11Google Scholar
  20. Leelasuphakul W, Hemmanee P, Chuenchitt S (2008) Growth inhibitory properties of Bacillus subtilis strains and their metabolites against the green mold pathogen (Penicillium digitatum Sacc.) of citrus fruit. Postharvest Biol Technol 48(1):113–121Google Scholar
  21. Lin F, Yang J, Muhammad U, Sun J, Huang Z, Li W, Lv F, Lu Z (2019) Bacillomycin D-C16 triggers apoptosis of gastric cancer cells through the PI3K/Akt and FoxO3a signaling pathways. Anti-Cancer Drugs 30(1):46–55Google Scholar
  22. Liu J, Hagberg I, Novitsky L, Hadj-Moussa H, Avis TJ (2014) Interaction of antimicrobial cyclic lipopeptides from Bacillus subtilis influences their effect on spore germination and membrane permeability in fungal plant pathogens. Fungal Biol 118(11):855–861Google Scholar
  23. Livak KJ, Schmittgen TD (2001) Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2− ΔΔCT method. Methods 25(4):402–408Google Scholar
  24. Perron GG, Zasloff M, Bell G (2006) Experimental evolution of resistance to an antimicrobial peptide. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 273(1583):251–256Google Scholar
  25. Rahman A, Uddin W, Wenner NG (2015) Induced systemic resistance responses in perennial ryegrass against Magnaporthe oryzae elicited by semi-purified surfactin lipopeptides and live cells of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens. Mol Plant Pathol 16(6):546–558Google Scholar
  26. Roberts WK, Selitrennikoff CP (1990) Zeamatin, an antifungal protein from maize with membrane-permeabilizing activity. Microbiology 136(9):1771–1778Google Scholar
  27. Schallmey M, Singh A, Ward OP (2004) Developments in the use of Bacillus species for industrial production. Can J Microbiol 50(1):1–17Google Scholar
  28. Selim S, Negrel J, Wendehenne D, Ochatt S, Gianinazzi S, van Tuinen D (2010) Stimulation of defense reactions in Medicago truncatula by antagonistic lipopeptides from Paenibacillus sp. strain B2. Appl Environ Microbiol 76(22):7420–7428Google Scholar
  29. Singh P, Cameotra SS (2004) Potential applications of microbial surfactants in biomedical sciences. Trends Biotechnol 22(3):142–146Google Scholar
  30. Sinha M, Singh RP, Kushwaha GS, Iqbal N, Singh A, Kaushik S, Kaur P, Sharma S, Singh TP (2014) Current overview of allergens of plant pathogenesis related protein families. Hindawi Publishing Corporation, Cairo, Egypt.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/543195 Google Scholar
  31. Souza TP, Dias RO, Silva-Filho MC (2017) Defense-related proteins involved in sugarcane responses to biotic stress. Genet Mol Biol 40(1):360–372Google Scholar
  32. Tanaka K, Ishihara A, Nakajima H (2014) Isolation of anteiso-C17, iso-C17, iso-C16, and iso-C15 Bacillomycin D from Bacillus amyloliquefaciens SD-32 and their antifungal activities against plant pathogens. J Agric Food Chem 62(7):1469–1476Google Scholar
  33. Tran H, Ficke A, Asiimwe T, Höfte M, Raaijmakers JM (2007) Role of the cyclic lipopeptide massetolide A in biological control of Phytophthora infestans and in colonization of tomato plants by Pseudomonas fluorescens. New Phytol 175(4):731–742Google Scholar
  34. Vilanova L, Viñas I, Torres R, Usall J, Buron-Moles G, Teixidó N (2014) Increasing maturity reduces wound response and lignification processes against Penicillium expansum (pathogen) and Penicillium digitatum (non-host pathogen) infection in apples. Postharvest Biol Technol 88:54–60Google Scholar
  35. Waewthongrak W, Leelasuphakul W, McCollum G (2014) Cyclic lipopeptides from Bacillus subtilis ABS–S14 elicit defense-related gene expression in citrus fruit. PLoS One 9(10):e109386Google Scholar
  36. Waewthongrak W, Pisuchpen S, Leelasuphakul W (2015) Effect of Bacillus subtilis and chitosan applications on green mold (Penicilium digitatum Sacc.) decay in citrus fruit. Postharvest Biol Technol 99:44–49Google Scholar
  37. Wang Y, Bao Y, Shen D, Feng W, Yu T, Zhang J, Zheng XD (2008) Biocontrol of Alternaria alternata on cherry tomato fruit by use of marine yeast Rhodosporidium paludigenum Fell & Tallman. Int J Food Microbiol 123(3):234–239Google Scholar
  38. Wei Y, Xu M, Wu H, Tu S, Pan L, Tu K (2016) Defense response of cherry tomato at different maturity stages to combined treatment of hot air and Cryptococcus laurentii. Postharvest Biol Technol 117:177–186Google Scholar
  39. Wei Y, Zhou D, Wang Z, Tu S, Shao X, Peng J, Pan L, Tu K (2017) Hot air treatment reduces postharvest decay and delays softening of cherry tomato by regulating gene expression and activities of cell wall-degrading enzymes. J Sci Food Agric 98:2105–2112Google Scholar
  40. Xie Y-R, Chen Z-Y, Brown RL, Bhatnagar D (2010) Expression and functional characterization of two pathogenesis-related protein 10 genes from Zea mays. J Plant Physiol 167(2):121–130Google Scholar
  41. Yamamoto S, Shiraishi S, Suzuki S (2015) Are cyclic lipopeptides produced by Bacillus amyloliquefaciens S13-3 responsible for the plant defence response in strawberry against Colletotrichum gloeosporioides? Lett Appl Microbiol 60(4):379–386Google Scholar
  42. Yan F, Xu S, Chen Y, Zheng X (2014) Effect of rhamnolipids on Rhodotorula glutinis biocontrol of Alternaria alternata infection in cherry tomato fruit. Postharvest Biol Technol 97:32–35Google Scholar
  43. Zhang Y, Zeng L, Yang J, Zheng X, Yu T (2015) 6-Benzylaminopurine inhibits growth of Monilinia fructicola and induces defense-related mechanism in peach fruit. Food Chem 187:210–217Google Scholar
  44. Zhao Y, Tu K, Su J, Tu S, Hou Y, Liu F, Zou X (2009) Heat treatment in combination with antagonistic yeast reduces diseases and elicits the active defense responses in harvested cherry tomato fruit. J Agric Food Chem 57(16):7565–7570Google Scholar
  45. Zhao Y, Tu K, Tu S, Liu M, Su J, Y-p H (2010) A combination of heat treatment and Pichia guilliermondii prevents cherry tomato spoilage by fungi. Int J Food Microbiol 137(1):106–110Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Food Science and TechnologyNanjing Agricultural UniversityNanjingChina
  2. 2.Teagasc Food Research CentreFermoyIreland

Personalised recommendations