Advertisement

Trees

pp 1–16 | Cite as

Different clonal responses to cypress canker disease based on transcription of suberin-related genes and bark carbohydrates’ content

  • R. Danti
  • M. G. Rotordam
  • G. Emiliani
  • A. Giovannelli
  • A. Papini
  • C. Tani
  • S. Barberini
  • G. Della Rocca
Original Article
  • 42 Downloads

Abstract

Key message

Suberin metabolism plays a crucial role in the compartmentalization of the necrotic bark tissues in cypress clones resistant to bark canker caused by Seiridium cardinale.

Abstract

In cypress, the main mechanism of resistance to the bark canker caused by the fungal pathogen Seiridium cardinale involves the post-infectional development of a well-structured necrophylactic periderm (NP). The impermeability and effectiveness of NP against pathogens has been associated with cell wall suberization. In canker-resistant and susceptible C. sempervirens clones, the transcript accumulation of four genes involved in suberin biosynthesis (Acyl-CoA thioesterase, stearoyl-ACP-desaturase, Caffeoyl-CoA-3-O-methyltransferase 1 and Peroxidase 21) was studied in inoculated and wounded bark tissues through qPCR assay during a 3 month trial. Quantification of non-structural carbohydrates in the same targeted tissues was also performed by HPLC. In the canker-resistant clone, transcript accumulation of all four examined genes significantly increased after both inoculation or wounding more than in the susceptible clone, and the maximum difference between the two clones was observed after 30 days. The type of clone significantly affected the transcript accumulation of all the four examined genes (main effects ANOVA). The total soluble sugars content detected in the bark tissues was constitutively similar in both clones, and only slight differences in the carbon balance were detected between the two clones 90 days after inoculation or wounding. Histological observations of bark sections stained with Sudan red 90 days after inoculation, showed that in the canker-resistant clone a greater suberin deposition occurred in the NP, which resulted thicker and better structured when compared to the susceptible clone.

Keywords

Seiridium cardinale Carbon balance Necrophylactic periderm Disease resistance Cupressus sempervirens Sudan Red Fluorol Yellow 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The study was partly funded by Fondazione Giorgio Tesi, through an annual grant for the training of young researchers and support to genetic improvement of cypress at IPSP-CNR. The Authors would like to extend their sincere thanks to Mrs Maria Laura Traversi for the analyses of soluble sugars and to Dr. Matthew Haworth and Dr. Federico Sebastiani for their critical reading of the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

468_2018_1745_MOESM1_ESM.docx (21 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 20 KB)

References

  1. Achotegui-Castells A, Danti R, Llusià J, Della Rocca G, Barberini S, Peñuelas J (2015) Strong induction of minor terpenes in Italian Cypress, Cupressus sempervirens, in response to infection by the fungus Seiridium cardinale. J Chem Ecol 41(3):224–243.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10886-015-0554-1 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Achotegui-Castells A, Della Rocca G, Llusià J, Danti R, Barberini S, Bouneb M, Simoni S, Michelozzi M, Peñuelas J (2016) Terpene arms race in the Seiridium cardinaleCupressus sempervirens pathosystem. Sci Rep 6:18954.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep18954 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Agrios GN (2005) Plant pathology, vol 922. Elsevier Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  4. Allison SD, Schultz JC (2004) Differential activity of peroxidase isozymes in response to wounding, gypsy moth, and plant hormones in northern red oak (Quercus rubra L.). J Chem Ecol 30(7):1363–1379.  https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOEC.0000037745.66972.3e PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Arnold T, Appel H, Patel V, Stocum E, Kavalier A, Schultz J (2004) Carbohydrate translocation determines the phenolic content of Populus foliage: a test of the sink–source model of plant defense. New Phytol 164:157–164.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2004.01157.x Google Scholar
  6. Barceló AR, Pomar F (2001) Oxidation of cinnamyl alcohols and aldehydes by a basic peroxidase from lignifying Zinnia elegans hypocotyls. Phytochemistry 57(7):1105–1113.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0031-9422(01)00050-4 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Berger S, Papadopoulos M, Schreiber U, Kaiser W, Roitsch T (2004) Complex regulation of gene expression, photosynthesis and sugar levels by pathogen infection in tomato. Physiol Plant 122(4):419–428.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.2004.00433.x Google Scholar
  8. Berger S, Sinha AK, Roitsch T (2007) Plant physiology meets phytopathology: plant primary metabolism and plant–pathogen interactions. J Exp Bot 58(15–16):4019–4026.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erm298 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Bernards MA (2002) Demystifying suberin. Can J Bot 80:227–240.  https://doi.org/10.1139/b02-017 Google Scholar
  10. Bernards MA, Fleming WD, Llewellyn DB, Priefer R, Yang X, Sabatino A, Plourde GL (1999) Biochemical characterization of the suberization-associated anionic peroxidase of potato. Plant Physiol 121(1):135–146.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.121.1.135 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Biggs AR (1984a) Boundary-zone formation in peach bark in response to wounds and Cytospora leucostoma infection. Can J Bot 62:2814–2821.  https://doi.org/10.1139/b84-375 Google Scholar
  12. Biggs AR (1984b) Intracellular suberin: occurrence and detection in tree bark. IAWA Bull 5:243–248.  https://doi.org/10.1163/22941932-90000899 Google Scholar
  13. Biggs AR (1985a) Detection of impervious tissue in tree bark with selective histochemistry and fluorescence microscopy. Stain Tech 60:299–304.  https://doi.org/10.3109/10520298509113928 Google Scholar
  14. Biggs AR (1985b) Suberized boundary zones and the chronology of wound response in tree bark. Phytopathology 75(11):1191–1195Google Scholar
  15. Biggs AR (1987) Occurrence and location of suberin in wound reaction zones in xylem of 17 tree species. Phytpathology 77:718–725.  https://doi.org/10.1094/Phyto-77-718 Google Scholar
  16. Biggs AR (1992) Anatomical and physiological responses of bark tissues to mechanical injury. In: Blanchette RA, Biggs AR (eds) Defense mechanisms of woody plants against fungi. Springer, Berlin, pp 13–40Google Scholar
  17. Bolouri Moghaddam MR, Van den Ende W (2012) Sugars and plant innate immunity. J Exp Bot 63(11):3989–3998.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/ers129 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Bolton MD (2009) Primary metabolism and plant defense-fuel for the fire. Mol Plant Microbe Interact 22(5):487–497.  https://doi.org/10.1094/MPMI-22-5-0487 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Bonello P, Blodgett JT (2003) Pinus nigraSphaeropsis sapinea as a model pathosystem to investigate local and systemic effects of fungal infection of pines. Physiol Mol Plant Pathol 63(5):249–261.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmpp.2004.02.002 Google Scholar
  20. Brundrett MC, Kendrick B, Peterson CA (1991) Efficient lipid staining in plant material with Sudan red 7B or Fluoral yellow 088 in polyethylene glycol glycerol. Biotech Histochem 66:111–116.  https://doi.org/10.3109/10520299109110562 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Chang S, Puryear J, Cairney J (1993) A simple and efficient method for isolating RNA from pine trees. Plant Mol Biol Rep 11(2):113–116Google Scholar
  22. Chassot C, Nawrath C, Metraux JP (2007) Cuticular defects lead to full immunity to a major plant pathogen. Plant J 49:972–980.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2006.03017.x PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Cheong YH, Chang HS, Gupta R, Wang X, Zhu T, Luan S (2002) Transcriptional profiling reveals novel interactions between wounding, pathogen, abiotic stress, and hormonal responses in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol 129:661–677.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.002857 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Christiansen E, Kucera B (1999) Resin pockets in Norway spruce wood are not caused by the bark beetle Ips typographus. Norsk Institutt for Skogforskning, NorwayGoogle Scholar
  25. Cleary MR, Van Der Kamp BJ, Morrison DJ (2012) Effects of wounding and fungal infection with Armillaria ostoyae in three conifer species. II. Host response to the pathogen. Forest Pathol 42(2):109–123.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0329.2011.00727.x Google Scholar
  26. Cosio C, Dunand C (2008) Specific functions of individual class III peroxidase genes. J Exp Bot 60(2):391–408.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/ern318 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Dangle JL, Jones JD (2001) Plant pathogens and integrated defence responses to infection. Nature 411:826–833.  https://doi.org/10.1038/35081161 Google Scholar
  28. Danti R, Della Rocca G (2017) Epidemiological history of Cypress Canker Disease in source and invasion sites. Forests 8:121:1–25.  https://doi.org/10.3390/f8040121 Google Scholar
  29. Danti R, Panconesi A, Di Lonardo V, Della Rocca G, Raddi P (2006) ‘Italico’ and ‘Mediterraneo’: two Seiridium cardinale canker-resistant cypress cultivars of Cupressus sempervirens. HortScience 41:1357–1359Google Scholar
  30. Danti R, Di Lonardo V, Pecchioli A, Della Rocca G (2013) ‘Le Crete 1’and ‘Le Crete 2’: two newly patented Seiridium cardinale canker-resistant cultivars of Cupressus sempervirens. For Pathol 43(3):204–210.  https://doi.org/10.1111/efp.12016 Google Scholar
  31. Dixon DP, Davis BG, Edwards R (2002) Functional divergence in the glutathione transferase superfamily in plants: identification of two classes with putative functions in redox homeostasis in Arabidopsis thaliana. J Biol Chem 277:30859–30869.  https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M202919200 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Dulermo T, Rascle C, Chinnici G, Gout E, Bligny R, Cotton P (2009) Dynamic carbon transfer during pathogenesis of sunflower by necrotrophic fungus Botritis cinerea: from plant hexoses to mannitol. New Phytol 183:1149–1162.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.02890.x PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. El Mansouri I, Mercado JA, Santiago Dómenech N, Pliego Alfaro F, Valpuesta V, Quesada MA (1999) Biochemical and phenotypical characterization of transgenic tomato plants overexpressing a basic peroxidase. Physiol Plant 106(4):355–362.  https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1399-3054.1999.106401.x Google Scholar
  34. Emiliani G, Traversi ML, Anichini M, Giachi G, Giovannelli A (2011) Transcript accumulation dynamics of phenylpropanoid pathway genes in the maturing xylem and phloem of Picea abies during latewood formation. J Integr Plant Biol 53(10):783–799.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7909.2011.01069.x PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Eyles A, Bonello P, Ganley R, Mohammed C (2010) Induced resistance to pests and pathogens in trees. New Phytol 185(4):893–908.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.03127.x PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Farmer EE, Alméras E, Krishnamurthy V (2003) Jasmonates and related oxylipins in plant responses to pathogenesis and herbivory. Curr Opin Plant Biol 6(4):372–378.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-5266(03)00045-1 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Franceschi VR, Krokene P, Christiansen E, Krekling T (2005) Anatomical and chemical defenses of conifer bark against bark beetles and other pests. New Phytol 167(2):353–376.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2005.01436.x PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Gaylord ML, Kolb TE, Pockman WT, Plaut JA, Yepez EA, Macalady AK, …McDowell NG (2013) Drought predisposes piñon–juniper woodlands to insect attacks and mortality. New Phytol 198(2):567–578.  https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.12174 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Ghosh M (2006) Antifungal properties of haem peroxidase from Acorus calamus. Ann Bot 98(6):1145–1153.  https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcl205 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. Giovannelli A, Emiliani G, Traversi ML, Deslauriers A, Rossi S (2011) Sampling cambial region and mature xylem for non-structural carbohydrates and starch analyses. Dendrochronologia 29(3):177–182.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dendro.2011.01.001 Google Scholar
  41. Graça J, Santos S (2007) Suberin: a biopolyester of plants’ skin. Macromol Biosci 7(2):128–135.  https://doi.org/10.1002/mabi.200600218 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Graniti A (1998) Cypress canker: a pandemic in progress. Annu Rev Phytopathol 36:91–114.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.phyto.36.1.91 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Guo D, Chen F, Inoue K, Blount JW, Dixon RA (2001) Downregulation of caffeic acid 3-O-methyltransferase and caffeoyl CoA 3-O-methyltransferase in transgenic alfalfa: impacts on lignin structure and implications for the biosynthesis of G and S lignin. Plant Cell 13(1):73–88.  https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.13.1.73 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. Hellemans J, Mortier G, De Paepe A, Speleman F, Vandesompele J (2007) qBase relative quantification framework and software for management and automated analysis of real-time quantitative PCR data. Genome biol 8(2):R19.  https://doi.org/10.1186/gb-2007-8-2-r19 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. Hua Y, Guo H, Zhou XG, Li X, Yang S et al (2014) Correlations between soluble sugar and phenol contents in leaves and Pear scab resistance. J Plant Pathol Microbiol 5(1):1–4.  https://doi.org/10.4172/2157-7471.1000213 Google Scholar
  46. Joseph JT, Poolakkalody NJ, Shah JM (2018) Plant reference genes for development and stress response studies. J Biosci 1(43):173–187.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12038-017-9728-z Google Scholar
  47. Kolattukudy PE (1980) Biopolyester membranes in plants: cutin and suberin. Science 208:990–1000.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.208.4447.990 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Kolattukudy PE (1984) Biochemistry and function of cutin and suberin. Can J Bot 62:2918–2933.  https://doi.org/10.1139/b84-391 Google Scholar
  49. Kolattukudy PE (1987) Lipid-derived defensive polymers and waxes and their role in plant–microbe interaction. In: Stumpf PK, Conn EE (eds) The biochemistry of plants, vol 11. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 291–314Google Scholar
  50. Krokene P, Nagy NE, Krekling T (2008) Traumatic resin ducts and polyphenolic parenchyma cells in conifers. In: Schaller A (ed) Induced plant resistance to herbivory. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 147–169.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8182-8_7 Google Scholar
  51. Lapin D, van den Ackerveken (2013) Susceptibility to plant disease: more than a failure of host immunity. Trends Plant Sci 18(10):546–554.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2013.05.005 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Lattanzio V, Lattanzio VMT, Cardinali A (2006) Role of phenolics in the resistance mechanisms of plant against fungal pathogens and insects. Phytochem Adv Res 661:23–67Google Scholar
  53. Lecompte F, Abro MA, Nicot PC (2013) Can plant sugars mediate the effect of nitrogen fertilization on lettuce susceptibility to two necrotrophic pathogens: Botrytis cinerea and Sclerotinia sclerotiorum? Plant Soil 369:387–401.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-012-1577-9 Google Scholar
  54. Lecompte F, Nicot PC, Ripoll J, Abro MA, Raimbault AK, Lopez-Lauri F, Bertin N (2017) Reduced susceptibility of tomato stem to the necrotrophic fungus Botrytis cinerea is associated with a specific adjustment of fructose content in the host sugar pool. Ann Bot 119:931–943.  https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcw240 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  55. Levy Y, Cohen Y (1984) A negative association between leaf sugar content and the development of northern leaf-blight lesion in sweet corn. Physiol Plant Pathol 24:247–252.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-4059(84)90032-8 Google Scholar
  56. Liechti R, Farmer EE (2003) The jasmonate biochemical pathway. Sci Signal 203:cm18.  https://doi.org/10.1126/stke.2003.203.cm18 Google Scholar
  57. Lindberg M, Johansson M (1991) Growth of Heterobasidion annosum through bark of Picea abies. Eur J For Path 21:377–388.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0329.1991.tb00775.x Google Scholar
  58. Lindberg M, Lundgren L, Gref R, Johansson M (1992) Stilbenes and resin acids in relation to the penetration of Heterobasidion annosum through bark of Picea abies. Eur J For Pathol 22:95–106.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0329.1992.tb01436.x Google Scholar
  59. Lulai EC, Corsini DL (1998) Differential deposition of suberin phenolic and aliphatic domains and their roles in resistance to infection during potato tuber (Solanum tuberosum L.) wound healing. Physiol Mol Plant Pathol 53:209–222.  https://doi.org/10.1006/pmpp.1998.0179 Google Scholar
  60. Magro P, Di Lenna P, Marciano P (1982) Cell-wall degrading enzymes produced by Seiridium cardinale, agent of the cypress canker. Eur J For Pathol 12:150–156.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0329.1982.tb01388.x Google Scholar
  61. Mehdy MC (1994) Active oxygen species in plant defense against pathogens. Plant Physiol 105(2):467–472PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  62. Millard P, Grelet GA (2010) Nitrogen storage and remobilization by trees: ecophysiological relevance in a changing world. Tree Physiol 30(9):1083–1095.  https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/tpq042 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Moriondo F (1972) Il cancro del cipresso da Coryneum cardinale Wag. I contributo: la progressione del processo infettivo nei tessuti caulinari. Ann Accad Ital Sci For 21:399–426Google Scholar
  64. Mullick DB (1977) The non-specific nature of defense in bark and wood during wounding, insect and pathogen attack (Studies of periderm, IX). Recent Adv Phytochem 11:395–441.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-8873-3_10 Google Scholar
  65. Mutto S, Panconesi A (1987) Ultrastructural modifications in Cupressus sempervirens tissues invaded by Seiridium cardinale. Eur J For Pathol 17:193–204.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0329.1987.tb01016.x Google Scholar
  66. Nicot N, Hausman JF, Hoffmann L, Evers D (2005) Housekeeping gene selection for real-time RT-PCR normalization in potato during biotic and abiotic stress. J Exp Bot 56(421):2907–2914.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/eri285 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Nsolomo VR, Woodward S (1997) Histological and histochemical detection of defence responses in pine embryos challenged in vitro with Heterobasidion annosum. Eur J For Pathol 27(3):187–195.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0329.1997.tb00860.x Google Scholar
  68. Oliva J, Stenlid J, Martínez-Vilalta J (2014) The effect of fungal pathogens on the water and carbon economy of trees: implications for drought-induced mortality. New Phytol 203(4):1028–1035.  https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.12857 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Passardi F, Longet D, Penel C, Dunand C (2004) The class III peroxidase multigenic family in rice and its evolution in land plants. Phytochemistry 65(13):1879–1893.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phytochem.2004.06.023 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Passardi F, Cosio C, Penel C, Dunand C (2005) Peroxidases have more functions than a Swiss army knife. Plant Cell Rep 24(5):255–265.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00299-005-0972-6 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Pfaffl MW (2001) A new mathematical model for relative quantification in real-time RT–PCR. Nucleic Acids Res 29(9):e45–e45.  https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/29.9.e45 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  72. Pollard M, Beisson F, Li Y, Ohlrogge JB (2008) Building lipid barriers: biosynthesis of cutin and suberin. Trends Plant Sci 13(5):236–246.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2008.03.003 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Ponchet J, Andreoli C (1989) Histopathologie du cancre du cypress à Seiridium cardinale. Eur J For Path 19:212–221.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0329.1989.tb00255.x Google Scholar
  74. Ponchet J, Andreoli C (1990) Compartmentalization and reaction in the host. In: Ponchet J (ed) Agrimed Res. Programme. Prog. EEC Res. Cypress Dis. Rep. EUR 12493 EN. Luxembourg, pp 96–111Google Scholar
  75. Quiroga M, Guerrero C, Botella M, Barceló A, Amaya I, Medina M, Alonso F, de Forchetti S, Tigier H, Valpuesta V (2000) A tomato peroxidase involved in the synthesis of lignin and suberin. Plant Physiol 122:1119–1127.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.122.4.1119 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  76. Raddi P, Panconesi A (1984) Pathogenicity of some isolates of Seiridium (Coryneum) cardinale, agent of cypress canker disease. Forest Pathol 14(6):348–354.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0329.1984.tb00184.x Google Scholar
  77. Raddi P, Panconesi A, Xenopoulos S, Ferrandes P, Andreoli C (1990) Genetic improvement for resistance to canker disease. In: Ponchet J (ed) Agrimed Res. Programme. Prog. EEC Res. Cypress Dis. Rep. EUR 12493 EN. Luxembourg, pp 127–134Google Scholar
  78. Rittinger PA, Biggs AR, Peirson DR (1987) Histochemistry of lignin and suberin deposition in boundary layers formed after wounding in various plant species and organs. Can J Bot 65(9):1886–1892.  https://doi.org/10.1139/b87-258 Google Scholar
  79. Roitsch T, Balibrea ME, Hofmann M, Proels R, Sinha AK (2003) Extracellular invertase: key metabolic enzyme and PR protein. J Exp Bot 54(382):513–524.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erg050 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Rolland F, Baena-Gonzalez E, Sheen J (2006) Sugar sensing and signaling in plants: conserved and novel mechanisms. Annu Rev Plant Biol 57:675–709.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.arplant.57.032905.105441 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. Santini A, Di Lonardo V (2000) Genetic variability of the ‘bark canker resistance’ character in several natural provenances of Cupressus sempervirens. Forest Pathol 30(2):87–96.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-0329.2000.00188.x Google Scholar
  82. Schultz J, Appel HM, Ferrieri AP, Arnold TM (2013) Flexible resource allocation during plant defense responses. Front Plant Sci 4:234.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2013.00324 Google Scholar
  83. Soler M, Serra O, Molinas M, Huguet G, Fluch S, Figueras M (2007) A genomic approach to suberin biosynthesis and cork differentiation. Plant Physiol 144(1):419–431.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.106.094227 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  84. Solla A, Tomlinson F, Woodward S (2002) Penetration of Picea sitchensis root bark by Armillaria mellea, Armillaria ostoyae and Heterobasidion annosum. Forest Pathol 32(1):55–70.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-0329.2002.00265.x Google Scholar
  85. Spanos KA, Pirrie A, Woodward S, Xenopolous S (1999) Responses in the bark of Cupressus sempervirens clones artificially incoulated with Seiridium cardinale under field conditions. Eur J For Pathol 29(2):135–142.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1439-0329.1999.00136.x Google Scholar
  86. Untergasser A, Cutcutache I, Koressaar T, Ye J, Faircloth BC, Remm M, Rozen SG (2012) Primer3—new capabilities and interfaces. Nucleic Acids Res 40(15):e115PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  87. Valiñas MA, Lanteri ML, Ten Have A, Andreu AB (2015) Chlorogenic acid biosynthesis appears linked with suberin production in potato tuber (Solanum tuberosum). J Agric Food Chem 63(19):4902–4913.  https://doi.org/10.1021/jf505777p PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. Vijayan P, Shockey J, Levesque CA, Cook RJ, Browse J (1998) A role for jasmonate in pathogen defense of Arabidopsis. Proc Natl Acad Sci 95(12):7209–7214.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.95.12.7209 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. Wahlström KT, Johansson M (1992) Structural responses in bark to mechanical wounding and Armillaria ostoyae infection in seedlings of Pinus sylvestris. Eur J For Pathol 22:65–76.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0329.1992.tb01434.x Google Scholar
  90. Woodward FI (1992) Predicting plant responses to global environmental change. New Phytol 122(2):239–251.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.1992.tb04228.x Google Scholar
  91. Woodward S, Pearce RB (1988) Responses of Sitka spruce callus to challenge with wood decay fungi. Forest Pathol 18(3-4):217–229.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0329.1988.tb00921.x Google Scholar
  92. Woodward S, Pocock S (1996) Formation of the ligno-suberized barrier zone and wound periderm in four species of European broad-leaved trees. Forest Pathol 26(2):97–105.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0329.1996.tb00714.x Google Scholar
  93. Woodward S, Bianchi S, Bodles WJ, Beckett L, Michelozzi M (2007) Physical and chemical responses of Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis) clones to colonization by Heterobasidion annosum as potential markers for relative host susceptibility. Tree Physiol 27(12):1701–1710.  https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/27.12.1701 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Sustainable Plant Protection, IPSP-CNRSesto FiorentinoItaly
  2. 2.Nanion Technologies GmbHMunichGermany
  3. 3.Trees and Timber Institute, IVALSA-CNRSesto FiorentinoItaly
  4. 4.Department of BiologyUniversity of FlorenceFlorenceItaly

Personalised recommendations