2021.06.02.13
Files > Volume 6 > Vol 6 No 2 2021
INVESTIGATION / RESEARCH
This is an early access version, the complete PDF, HTML, and XML versions will be available soon.
Identification of maize kernel resistance proteins against Aspergillus flavus by a statistical approach: A predictive model of resistance capacity.
Leandro Balzano, 1; Jesús Alezones, 2;
Nardy Diez García 3.
Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.21931/RB/2021.06.02.13 (registering DOI)
ABSTRACT
Although kernel infection by Aspergillus flavus and pre-harvest
aflatoxin contamination of Zea mays
grain is a significant crop production problem, not only in Venezuela but also
around the world, little progress has been made in identifying proteins and
metabolic pathways associated with this pathogen resistance. Usually, a protein
with a two-fold expression between control and condition is considered a
biomarker of some phenomena, but we think it is essential to evaluate its
contribution to resistance. That is why we decided to determine the behavior's
resistance capacity in terms of expression levels of an identified protein of
maize kernels infected with A. flavus
by using a multivariate approach. In
this work, we identify 47 of 66 differentially expressed spots with a
remarkable contribution to resistance against the fungus Aspergillus flavus. We
finally test
this approach to know if it can be used as a predictive resistance model and probe it by including theoretical and experimental protein expression
profiles of other inoculated maize lines.
Keywords. Host resistance, resistance-associated proteins, Zea mays, Aspergillus flavus, comparative
proteomics, resistance predictive model.
INTRODUCTION
The latest statistics released by the Food and Agriculture Organization
of the United Nations (FAO), indicate that by the year 2011, maize was the
second most produced and demanded vegetable item in the world, after sugar cane1. Fungi are the world's primary cause of maize crop loss because
of their economic implications, which represents a substantial phytosanitary problem
to be solved. In Venezuela, the major maize crop pathogen is Aspergillus flavus, with 35-45% of
incidence. It is the cause of around 80% percent of kernel losses because it reduces
not only the grain nutritional value, but also its presence usually causes the
accumulation of highly toxic and carcinogenic secondary metabolites named
aflatoxins2–6.
In general, plants can respond to
invasion by pathogens through the activation of a variety of defense
strategies, which are induced by complex interactions between biochemical
pathways in a coordinated manner7,8. Defense responses generally include several
cellular changes due to variations of protein expressions involved in cellular
metabolism, as the production of structural carbohydrates, structural proteins,
signal transcription and translation, transporters, intracellular traffic, and
production of antimicrobial compounds, among other processes9,10. However, there is not much research
focused on the response mechanisms of maize against fungal infection. Despite being a long-term method, recurrent selection can decrease
or even eliminate fungicide dependent cultures. Besides, it is a low cost
method, so it is widely used in developing countries11,12.
Resistant plant selection is made a long time ago and tries to
relate phenotypical characteristics with genotypical ones. Kernel screening
(KSA) assay is a resistance-evaluation method that consists of maize grain
exposition to a pathogen concentration to determine its capacity to inhibit
pathogen proliferation13. In this work, we modified this method to increase the A. flavus spores concentration to 4x106
spores/mL of A. flavus. We evaluated the kernel
differential-expression proteins between high-production A. flavus-infection-susceptible
and A. flavus-infection-resistant maize lines to determine plant
resistance mechanisms. We extracted maize grain proteins using two different pH
buffers, quantified them, and verified their integrity. Then we obtained two-dimensional
patterns and compared them, detecting multiple protein-expression variations.
All the information obtained allowed the generation of similarity
matrices that were used to study the relationships among maize genotypes investigated
using different techniques of classification/ordination such as principal
components analysis14,15, Neighbor-joining clustering algorithm16,17 and principal coordinates analysis18. The combination of these techniques allows two crucial facts: 1.-
determining the proteins differential pattern expression that majorly contributes
with resistance capacity by the interpretation of the variables responsible for
the classification or ordination, which were identified by MALDI-TOF mass
spectrometry, to construct a resistance response model of a maize-grain cell
against A. flavus and 2.- developing
a methodological strategy of data processing that is capable of predict the resistance
level of other maize lines.
MATERIALS
AND METHODS
Maize lines
and fungal selection.
We pre-selected eleven high-production maize lines developed
initially by the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) and
adapted to Venezuelan lands, based on two characteristics, 1.- its high
productivity and 2.- its resistance capacity against A. flavus determined by modified KSA assay13. After that, we selected four lines based on the grain color, two
highly resistant (one white grain and one yellow grain) and two highly
susceptible (one white grain and one yellow grain). We inoculated the seeds
with 4x106 spores/mL of A. flavus and incubated each grain line for 7 days, at
30ºC and 90-100% humidity resistance-capacity evaluation (figure 1), and 20 h
for protein-expression profile evaluations.
A. flavus Ospino 1-B was the fungal strain used due to its high
colonization power. It was grown on agar plates at 30 °C until the mycelium had
covered all the plates, and the spores were collected by shaking the plate in
sterile water. The spores were then counted in a Neubauer chamber to inoculate
maize grains with the mentioned spore quantity.

Figure 1. Characteristics of the chosen high-production
maize lines in terms of their resistance or susceptibility to A. flavus. Kernel screening assay of
the selected maize lines showing its resistance or susceptibility against A. flavus 4x106 spores /mL
defined by fungus proliferation ratio in 7 days of infection.
Protein extraction.
For protein extraction, each plant's whole grain was pulverized
with liquid nitrogen, and aliquots of 100 mg were homogenized in 1 mL of
extraction buffer mixed with 1X protease inhibitor mix (GE healthcare). Two
different protein extraction buffers (pH=2.8 or pH=7.5) were used according to
the protocol described by Campo et al.19. These aliquots were incubated for 1h with continuous slow
stirring and then were centrifuged at 16.000 g for 5 min at 4°C. The supernatants'
proteins were incubated at -20°C overnight, with two volumes of methanol, so
the final alcohol concentration in the mixture was 70%. Then, all tubes were
centrifuged at 16.000g for 5 min at 4°C, the supernatants were discarded and
the pellets were washed twice with 70% ethanol at 4°C, after which, the tubes
were centrifuged again, the supernatants were discarded, and all the precipitates
were saved at -70°C until use. The protein pools were resuspended in 50 µL
DeStreak buffer (GE Healthcare), quantified by the Bradford QuickStart® method (Bio-Rad), and SDS-PAGE verified
their integrity. We carried out three independent infection experiments, with
three protein extractions of the pulverized plant material, in order to explore
the protein level variations associated with the biological material and the
experimental techniques.
Two-dimensional gel electrophoresis.
Nonlinear pH 3-10 isoelectric focusing
dry strip gels (GE Healthcare) were rehydrated overnight in 250 µL rehydration
solution (8M urea, 1% CHAPS, 20mM DTT, and 0.2% of 3-10 non/linear carrier
ampholytes), along with 30 µg (analytical) or 100 µg (preparative) of proteins.
Isoelectric focusing was performed at 20°C in an Ettam IPGphor (GE Healthcare),
following the standard protocol recommended by the fabricant: gradual increase
until 200V for 20 min, gradual increase until 450V for 15 min, gradual increase
until 750V for 15 min, gradual increase until 2000V for 30 min, all gradual
increases were performed being careful not to overcome 25 milliamperes. After
isoelectric focusing, gel strips were equilibrated for 15 min in a buffer containing 50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.8), 6 M urea, 30%
glycerol, 2% SDS containing 10 mg/mL DTT, followed for 15 min with the same
buffer but containing 5 mg/mL iodoacetamide instead of DTT. For the second
dimension, strips were loaded onto SDS polyacrylamide gels (12% acrylamide separating
gel, 8x7x0.1 cm, width x height x thickness), then the top of the gel was
sealed with 1% agarose solution, and finally, we ran two-dimentional gel
electrophoresis at 200V for about 35 min, until the front run was about to go out
of the gel. All gels were silver-stained with PlusOne Silver staining kit (GE Healthcare) which is compatible with
mass espectrometry. Gel were digitized with an HP scanner and analyzed with the
Phoretix 2D v-2004 (nonlinear Dynamics Ltd.) program.
Comparative analysis of protein expression profiles.
The protein expression profiles obtained
from all maize lines were compared in two different analyses, white lines, and
yellow ones, between each other. We decided to compare just the profiles obtained
from A. flavus-inoculated susceptible
maize grain lines with those obtained from A.
flavus-inoculated resistant maize grain lines. The two-fold
differential-expression proteins detected by the Phoretix 2D program (Nonlinear
Dynamics Ltd.) were selected for peptide sequencing.
Protein identification and database search.
Proteins were identified by peptide mass
fingerprinting using MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry (MS) performed with a PrOTOF
2000 (Perkin-Elmer Inc.) instrument, previously calibrated with
trypsin-digested bovine serum albumin. For the analysis, 1µL of tryptic
peptides were mixed with 1 µL of the matrix (α-cyano-4-hydroxycinnamic acid,
5mg/mL) and loaded on a stainless steel MALDI plate. Protein identification was carried out using MASCOT (Matrix Science Ltd.) or Protein
Prospector software (v5.10.1, UCSF Mass Spectrometry Facility, University of California).
Nonredundant NCBI (National Center for Biotechnology Information), MSDB, and SwissProt (European Bioinformatics
Institute Heidelberg, Germany) databases20,21 were used for the search. The search parameters applied were described
by Lee et al.22; they are a mass tolerance of 50 ppm with one incomplete cleavage
allowed; alkylation of cysteine by carbamidomethylation was the only fixed
modification; the variable modifications considered were acetylation of the N-terminus,
oxidation of methionine, and the pyroGlu formation of N-terminal Gln.
Resistance response
models.
With all the available information and the additional one gathered in
this work, we propose a whole maize cell resistance response model after 20 h
of infection by A. flavus. This model
was accomplished using bioinformatics interphases indexed in
http://www.bioprofiling.de/index.html, which employs the information stored in
NCBI and SwissProt
databases20,21. These tools can be applied in just one
plant, Arabidopsis thaliana, so the
only way to use it was, placing this plant's accession number of homolog
proteins instead of maize-identified proteins.
Statistical
analysis for biomarkers determination and resistance prediction-method
generation.
The data of the 2D gels spots areas
were used to determine the proteome-differences under the same conditions of
infection, useful information to determine the differential-expression proteins
more closely associated with maize-grain resistance cells against the fungus. We
applied principal coordinates analysis (PCoA) to the binomial-transformed and
mathematically size-adjusted by generalized Procrustes data matrices and
projected on the principal coordinate plane to determine levels of resistance
of the lines under study, given by its plane location. Cluster analysis was performed
to evaluate the relationship between the proteins present in all the lines
under study. We also applied Principal Components Analysis (PCA) to all
original data matrices previously grouped by color and resistance capacity,
eliminating extraction buffer variable by generalized Procrustes, to determine
the spots that majorly contribute to resistance characteristic. We finally evaluated
the statistical resistance-predictive method applied by using experimental and theoretical
lines with characteristics of both resistant lines and evaluating them by
principal coordinates analysis. All analysis was realized with the software
InfoStat23.
RESULTS AND
DISCUSSION
Maize lines
selection. Guided by the mentioned
characteristics, we pre-selected 11 maize lines (Table 1), and then we selected
4 maize lines from this initial selection: 2 resistant and 2 susceptible to A. flavus infection. White grain lines
were selected with a close relationship between them, both having the same germplasm
source, known as Tuxpeño 1. In contrast, yellow grain lines were deliberately
selected with different germplasm sources (CML-409 is derived from "Antigua
Veracruz" population, while CML-497 is derived from RCY source). The
maize-grain-lines-resistance levels were confirmed by KSA assay (figure 1),
modified as mentioned

Table
1. Modified KSA assay results of pre-selected maize lines against A. flavus grain
infection. These results are ordered by resistance capacity 7 days
post-infection. Adjusted values by a mean test (5%) of three replicates.
Although CML-493 was the most resistant maize line, it was not
used because it is a quality protein maize (QPM) line, and we neither used
CML-7 maize line even though it was the most susceptible line, because its
yield in tons per hectare in Venezuela is far lower than the one of CML-448
maize line.
Evaluation of
studied maize lines proteomes. We decided to study the relationship between the four
evaluated proteomes and determine if there is any proteome expression-pattern
difference in the proteins with both types of lines, yellow and white. For
this, we used a data matrix using only proteins present in at least one of the
white lines and one of the yellow maize lines, resulting in 224 spots. Generalized
Procrustes adjusted this data matrix to eliminate the extraction method factor
and maintaining only the factors, grain color, and resistance capacity. We made
a cluster analysis of the adjusted matrix, using calculating the square Euclidean
distance and Ward. We demonstrate that the proteomes obtained from the two
resistant lines, under infection conditions for 20 hours, are more similar than
those with their same color-susceptible lines. Furthermore, the relationship
between resistant lines is stronger than the relationship between susceptible
lines. This
demonstrates that, under infection, both resistant lines show a similar
response mechanism (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Cluster diagram of the four studied lines inoculated (20h) with A. flavus. This was made using the 224
spots detected in at least one yellow line and one white line. It shows a
stronger relationship between the resistant lines' proteome with each other
than between maize-grain color. Results obtained with InfoStat v 2012.
Determination of major
resistance-contributing proteins. Using
these 224 spots matrices, we made a
PCA to determine the proteins (variables) that majorly contribute to each maize
line's centroids position and, consequently, to resistance capacity. In this
way, we determined that 66 proteins majorly contribute to resistance (figure
3). In this figure, we show the 66 proteins spot number, separated by colors where
spots in green are the spots that majorly contribute to the YR line position,
in blue are the spots that majorly contribute to the WR line position, and in
red are the spots that majorly contribute to the position of both resistant
lines. We then decided to identify these
significant resistance-contributing proteins.

Figure 3.
Principal components analysis to determine resistance-contributing proteins. Statistical analysis made using InfoStat v201223.
Protein identification by peptide-mass
fingerprinting and sequencing. MALDI-TOF
MS. carried out identification of the two-fold up or down-regulated proteins. Selected
spots were subjected to in-gel tryptic digestion. MALDI-TOF MS analysis and
mass spectra were searched against the protein sequence databases. 47 of the 66
selected spots were identified by peptide mass fingerprinting (PMF) (Table 2).
Two to three peptides were sequenced from each spot for protein identification.
Nineteen proteins remained unidentified, some of them because the homology
score was too low to consider it as that protein, others because they did not
show significant homology to any known protein sequence. This is an exciting
matter for further investigations. We consider it essential to remark some of
the identified proteins, like NADPH HC toxin reductase (NHCTR), whose function
is to inactivate HC toxin, a cyclic tetrapeptide Helminthosporium
carbonum, by carbonyl group reduction24. Hm1
was the first considered resistance gene cloned and evaluated, proving the toxin's
encoded protein activity25. HC toxin is a potent histone
deacetylase inhibitor26. Histone deacetylase eliminates
histones, acetyl groups, transforming the lysine and arginine amino groups into
amides, diminishing their DNA affinity, allowing separation and posterior
transcription. Thus, HC toxin inhibits the separation between histones and DNA,
inhibiting protein transcription, probably resistance proteins27. At the transcriptional level, we
determined an overexpression in the resistant lines after infection, exceptionally
the white resistant (WR) line that reaches higher relative-expression values.
Besides, there are no significant changes in the white susceptible (WS) line
after infection, and we could not detect any expression level in the yellow
susceptible (YS) line (data not shown or see supplementary data or figure S1). This
protein showed an overexpression on white-grains resistant-maize line with
respect to the susceptible one at the translational level and was not detected
in yellow lines.

Table 2. Summary of the proteins identified by MS from fungal-infected
grains by both buffers.
NADPH HC toxin reductase overexpression
in WR line was detected in this work, a fascinating result, because it is known
that this enzyme responds almost
exclusively to the fungus Helminthosporium
carbonum, due to a coevolution phenomenon between the two organisms28. This result indicates that A.
flavus somehow stimulates maize grains response mechanisms, similar to those
activated by H. carbonum, perhaps
because of a similar infection mechanism. In H. carbonum, the toxin synthesis depends on a complex locus of five
genes that encodes, among other things, promoter proteins and HC-toxin synthase
(Genbank: M98024.2)29. We compared the HC-toxin synthase sequence of H. carbonum
with A. flavus (taxid:5059) and found a mRNA sequence coding for a
protein with 97% of homology NRRL3357, nonribosomal peptide synthase Pes1
(XM_002380451.1). This suggests the existence of a similar toxin-synthesis
mechanism between the two fungi, which provokes an overexpression of NADPH HC
toxin reductase. This work is the first report of overexpression of this enzyme
caused by A. flavus.
We also
detected four proteins involved in the shikimate pathway, phospho-2-dehydro-3-deoxyheptonate aldolase
2 (PDDA2), myb-like transcription factor (myb-P), chalcone synthase
(ChS), and α-1,4-glucan-protein synthase (α-GS), which describe their importance
in the resistance phenomena. Several proteins involved in the catabolism, phosphoglycerate
kinase (PGK), xylose isomerase (XI), soluble inorganic pyrophosphatase (SIPP), glyceraldehyde
3-phosphate dehydrogenase cyt 1 (GAPDHc1), fructose bisphosphate aldolase (FBA),
are required for energy production due to the high demand to face the pathogen.
Additionally, we
detected chaperone proteins, motor proteins, ATP synthesis proteins and transmembrane
transporters, and some hypothetical and unknown functional proteins.
Response model of a
maize-kernel cell against A. flavus at
20 hours infection. All
the information gathered was used to develop a response model that describes
the processes that we consider provide the highest corn-kernels
resistance-levels against A. flavus.
The ORFs whose role is not confirmed yet, were not included in the response
model. Figure 4 shows the model which summarizes what occurs within the cell,
including proteins reported in other studies19,30–37. It can be noted
that an immediate response mechanism takes place (left side of the model),
where an overexpression of several proteins responsible for reactive-oxygen
species (ROS) production occurs. These ROS are involved both in the direct
attack and in cell damaged wall repair, but they are highly toxic for host
cells, because they cause membrane pores, protein damage and conglomeration
among other events. Therefore, the activation of proteins related to ROS
degradation can be expected as was observed. Chaperone proteins that protect
the native proteins folding were also detected, and the subexpression of
proteins related to the degradation of other proteins indicates that in resistant-plants
maize-grains, the protection of proteins already synthesized is favored instead
of protein degradation and resynthesis, which supposes lower energy cost. We
found that energy is not wasted unnecessarily. However, energy requirements
increase proportionally because of infection, which stimulates an increase of
catabolic-proteins expression and an increase of ATP synthesis in chloroplasts
and mitochondria, and an energy waste necessary for proteins synthesis involved
in defense against ROS species, as well as of proteins involved in synthesis of
molecules used for direct attack and in cell wall-repair and reinforcement,
both in affected cells and in neighbor ones, which stops the infection advance.
Our study differs from others where the point of view is from the fungus and
not from the maize's response38,39.

Figure 4. Response model of maize kernel cell
against A. Flavus at 20 hours post-infection. The model was constructed using
the characteristics that we consider to provide the highest maize kernel cells
resistance against infection with A. flavus. In gray, we show the most relevant
proteins reported; in light blue, proteins with only their translational
behavior; and in dark blue, proteins with transcriptional and translational
behavior.
Statistical analysis for correlating proteome with resistance capacity. All original data matrices of the proteins
with differential expression patterns were analized to correlate spots present
in both yellow and white grain maize obtained by both buffers, so we regrouped
all information, making irrelevant the extraction buffers just focus on grain
color and resistance capacity. This was accomplished by transformation to
presence/absence (binomial), and we applied generalized Procrustes methodology.
Distance matrices generated were submitted to PCoA (figure 5). In this figure
we noted that due to the matrices characteristics, 266-483 variables (spots)
depending on the evaluated matrix and only in 4 cases (white resistant line
proteome, white susceptible line proteome, yellow resistant line proteome, and
yellow susceptible line proteome) PCoA could collect 97.6% of the information
in the two firs axis, noticing that in axis X is the information concerning the
grain color and in Y axis, the resistance capacity (figure 5). We can also observe
that due to their distances from the centroid to the Y axis, WS (CML-448) and WR (CML-397) are the most susceptible and the most
resistant lines, respectively, which corroborates the results of the modified
KSA assay (table 1).
We think that the PCoA generates a
statistical plane used as a predictive model of resistance capacity against A. flavus.

Figure 5. Principal coordinate
analysis of the studied maize lines proteomic expression patterns. Points are centroids of
each studied maize line. Note that in axis X is the information concerning the
grain color and in Yaxis, the resistance capacity. Results obtained with InfoStat v 201223.
Testing
the predictive statistical model of resistance. To evaluate the proposed statistical predictive
model, we perform a principal coordinates analysis including not only the
studied maize lines proteomes behavior, but also by creating two theoretical
maize lines, a theoretical white resistant line (ThWR) which has the spot
behavior of WR plus the protein patterns identified in YR that could bring
resistance but absent in the WR line (figure 6A); and a theoretical yellow resistant
line (ThYR), which has the spot behavior of YR plus the protein patterns
identified in WR, that could bring resistance but absent in the YR line (figure
6B). Specifically, for the ThWR we added to its theoretical proteome, the
behavior of the two isoforms of aldose reductase, Hypothetical protein Loc100273276 and
aquaporin PIP1-5 obtained from yellow lines. For the ThYR case we added to the
theoretical proteome, the behavior of NADPH HC toxin reductase, Phospho-2-dehydro-3-deoxyheptonate aldolase 2, the isoforms of Lon
protease homolog 2, peroxisomal, NADPH adrenodoxin oxidoreductase Fructose bisphosphate aldolase, the isoforms of Phosphoglycerate kinase, ATP synthase β chain and the HSP70 obtained from the white lines. Statistical analysis demonstrates two
important aspects; in first place, the metabolic model of maize kernel-cell
response to the infection of A. flavus
is very accurate, and in the second place, they corroborate the predictive
power of the model developed in this work. Although ThWR receives no
statistical gain in resistance when we incorporate the factors absent from it
but present in YR, it demonstrates the predictive power of statistical analysis
developed since the ThWR is located towards the white lines. For the case of
the ThYR, we can see that the line remains located on the side of the yellow
lines, which confirms the capacity of the predictive statistical model.
Furthermore, by ThYR location in coordinates plane, we can infer that this
hypothetical line would be more resistant than its original line (YR), which
corroborates the contribution of the protein's behavior obtained from WR to resistance.

Figure 6. Test of PCoA
predictive model using theoretical white (A) and yellow (B) maize lines. In (A) we observe no
gain of resistance of the ThWR line than WR line; the analysis collects 93.7%
of the information. In (B) we observe a real gain of resistance capacity of
ThYR line compared to YR line when we include the behavior of some proteins
from WR line that are absent in YR. The analysis collects 72.52% of the information.
Results obtained with
InfoStat v 201223.
We decided to make a final test of the model
incorporating the proteome behavior obtained from the other two pre-selected
maize lines (CML-46 and CML-247) at the same time (figure 7). In these results,
we can see that both lines locate not only on the white side of the coordinates
plane, but also their position concerning Y axis, which is the axis that
collects the information relative to resistance capacity. This corroborates the
statistical analysis predictive capacity and demonstrates its strong relationship
with KSA results (table 1). KSA results reported CML-46 line to be slightly
more resistant than YR (CML-409), but not as much as WR (CML-397) line, and on
the other hand, CML- 247 was reported to be more susceptible than YS (CML-497)
but less than WS (CML-448). These are the same results obtained by proteomics
and PCoA analysis developed in this work.

Figure 7. Test of PCoA predictive model using two
more maize lines proteomic behavior. We observe that both lines locate not only on the white
side of the coordinates plane but also on the coordinates plane, corroborating
the statistical analysis predictive capacity. In two planes, the analysis
collects 92.2% of the information. Results obtained with InfoStat v 201223.
CONCLUSIONS
This work exhibits a global view of the
interrelations between the maize-kernel cell-proteins that occurs in response
to infection with A. flavus, in an
easy-to-understand response model of an individual cell. Besides, with the
statistical analysis developed, it was possible to determine which proteins contribute
to resistance capacity. Principal coordinates analysis allowed us to generate a
statistical plane that can be used as a predictive method of other maize lines'
resistance capacity. Cluster analysis showed that the proteomes obtained from
the two resistant lines under infection conditions are more similar between
each other than between susceptible lines. Furthermore, this relation is closer
than the relationship between susceptible lines. This demonstrates that under
infection, both resistant lines show a similar response mechanism. This work is
the first known report of overexpression of NADPH HC toxin reductase stimulated
by A. flavus infection. The presence
of a similar enzyme to HC toxin synthetase from H. carbonum in the genome of A.
flavus, detected by sequence homology, suggests the existence of a similar
toxin and corroborates this result. We finally present an overview of the
response mechanism of maize kernels to infection with A. flavus, and propose the use of these statistical methods of
resistance capacity determination, using proteins expression pattern for a recurrent
selection process to choose the most resistant maize lines after each sowing
event, always preserving the required productivity levels.
Acknowledgments.
This work was supported by the
BID-FONACIT II project Nº N-100001-D. We also thank the Fundación DANAC, for the
assistance with material and equipment to accomplish several KSA assays.
REFERENCES
1.
FAOSTAT Database [Internet]. [cited
2012 May 1]. Available
from: http://faostat.fao.org/site/339/default.aspx
2. Malaguti
G. Section 3: Enfermedades del maíz en Venezuela. In: Fontana H, González C,
editors. El maíz en Venezuela. Caracas: Fundación Polar publications; 2000. p.
245–50.
3. Medina-Martínez
MS, Martínez AJ. Mold occurrence and aflatoxin B1
and fumonisin B1 determination in corn samples in Venezuela. J Agric Food Chem. 2000;48(7):2833–6.
4. Mazzani C,
Borges O, Luzón O, Barrientos V, Quijada P. Incidencia de Aspergillus flavus,
Fusarium moniliforme, aflatoxinas y fumonisinas en ensayos de híbridos de maíz
en Venezuela. Fitopatol Venez. 1999;12(9):13.
5. Paliwal
RL. El Maíz en los trópicos: Mejoramiento y producción. Introducción
al maíz y su importancia. Files deposit of the food and agriculture
organization of the United Nations (FAO); 2001.
6.
Pingali PL, Heisey PW. Cereal-crop
productivity in developing countries: past trends and future prospects. In:
Alston J, Pardey P, Taylor, editors. Agricultural science policy: Changing
global agendas [Internet]. Baltimore and London: The International Food Policy
Research Institute / The John Hopkins University Press; 2001. p. 56–82.
Available from: http://www.cimmyt.org
7.
Miché L, Battistoni F, Gemmer S,
Belghazi M, Reinhold-Hurek B. Upregulation of jasmonate-inducible defense
proteins and differential colonization of roots of Oryza sativa cultivars with
the endophyte Azoarcus sp. Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 2006;19(5):502–11.
8.
Schenk PM, Kazan K, Wilson I, Anderson
JP, Richmond T, Somerville SC, et al. Coordinated plant defense responses in
Arabidopsis revealed by microarray analysis. Proc Natl Acad Sci.
2000;97(21):11655–60.
9.
Hajduch M, Ganapathy A, Stein JW,
Thelen JJ. A systematic proteomic study of seed filling in soybean.
Establishment of high-resolution two-dimensional reference maps, expression
profiles, and an interactive proteome database. Plant Physiol.
2005;137(4):1397–419.
10.
Kaku H, Nishizawa Y, Ishii-Minami N,
Akimoto-Tomiyama C, Dohmae N, Takio K, et al. Plant cells recognize chitin
fragments for defense signaling through a plasma membrane receptor. Proc Natl
Acad Sci. 2006;103(29):11086–91.
11. Paliwal
RL. El Maíz en los trópicos: Mejoramiento y producción. Enfermedades
del maíz. Files deposit of the food and agriculture organization of the United
Nations (FAO); 2001.
12.
Tubajika KM, Damann KE. Sources of
resistance to aflatoxin production in maize. J Agric Food Chem. 2001;49(5):2652–6.
13.
Brown RL, Cleveland TE, Payne GA,
Woloshuk CP, Campbell KW, White DG. Determination of resistance to aflatoxin
production in maize kernels and detection of fungal colonization using an
Aspergillus flavus transformant expressing Escherichia coli β-glucuronidase.
Phytopathology. 1995;85(9):983–9.
14.
Anderson TW. Asymptotic theory for
principal component analysis. Ann Math Stat. 1963;34(1):122–48.
15.
Krzanowski WJ. Between-groups
comparison of principal components. J Am Stat Assoc. 1979;74(367):703–7.
16.
Saitou N, Nei M. The neighbor-joining
method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol Biol Evol.
1987;4(4):406–25.
17.
Sneath PH, Sokal RR. Numerical
taxonomy. The principles and practice of numerical classification. San
Francisco, USA: Freeman W.H. and Co.; 1973. 573 p.
18.
Gower JC. Some distance properties of
latent root and vector methods used in multivariate analysis. Biometrika. 1966;53(3–4):325–38.
19.
Campo S, Carrascal M, Coca M, Abián J,
San Segundo B. The defense response of germinating maize embryos against fungal
infection: a proteomics approach. Proteomics. 2004;4(2):383–96.
20.
BioProfiling.de [Internet]. [cited 2011
Aug 1]. Available from: http://www.bioprofiling.de/index.html
21.
European Bioinformatics Institute
[Internet]. [cited 2011 Oct 1]. Available from: http://www.ebi.ac.uk/
22.
Lee D-G, Ahsan N, Lee S-H, Kang KY,
Bahk JD, Lee I-J, et al. A proteomic approach in analyzing heat‐responsive
proteins in rice leaves. Proteomics. 2007;7(18):3369–83.
23. Di Rienzo
JA, Casanoves F, Balzarini M, González L, Robledo C. InfoStat version 2012
[Internet]. Argentina: Universidad Nacional de Córdoba; 2012. Available
from: http://www.infostat.com.ar/
24.
Han F, Kleinhofs A, Kilian A, Ullrich
SE. Cloning and mapping of a putative barley NADPH-dependent HC-toxin
reductase. Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 1997;10(2):234–9.
25.
Meeley RB, Walton JD. Enzymatic
detoxification of HC-toxin, the host-selective cyclic peptide from Cochliobolus
carbonum. Plant Physiol. 1991;97(3):1080–6.
26.
Brosch G, Ransom R, Lechner T, Walton
JD, Loidl P. Inhibition of maize histone deacetylases by HC toxin, the
host-selective toxin of Cochliobolus carbonum. Plant Cell. 1995;7(11):1941–50.
27.
Choudhary C, Kumar C, Gnad F, Nielsen
ML, Rehman M, Walther TC, et al. Lysine acetylation targets protein complexes
and co-regulates major cellular functions. Science. 2009;325(5942):834–40.
28.
Haubruck H, Prange R, Vorgias C,
Gallwitz D. The ras‐related
mouse ypt1 protein can functionally replace the YPT1 gene product in yeast.
EMBO J. 1989;8(5):1427–32.
29.
Walton JD. HC-toxin. Phytochemistry.
2006;67(14):1406–13.
30.
Baker RL, Brown RL, Chen Z-Y, Cleveland
TE, Fakhoury AM. A maize lectin-like protein with antifungal activity against
Aspergillus flavus. J Food Prot. 2009;72(1):120–7.
31.
Baker RL, Brown RL, Chen Z-Y, Cleveland
TE, Fakhoury AM. A maize trypsin inhibitor (ZmTIp) with limited activity
against Aspergillus flavus. J Food Prot. 2009;72(1):185–8.
32.
Bravo JM, Campo S, Murillo I, Coca M,
San Segundo B. Fungus-and wound-induced accumulation of mRNA containing a class
II chitinase of the pathogenesis-related protein 4 (PR-4) family of maize.
Plant Mol Biol. 2003;52(4):745–59.
33.
Chen Z-Y, Brown RL, Damann KE,
Cleveland TE. Identification of unique or elevated levels of kernel proteins in
aflatoxin-resistant maize genotypes through proteome analysis. Phytopathology.
2002;92(10):1084–94.
34.
Chen Z-Y, Brown RL, Rajasekaran K, Damann
KE, Cleveland TE. Identification of a maize kernel pathogenesis-related protein
and evidence for its involvement in resistance to Aspergillus flavus infection
and aflatoxin production. Phytopathology. 2006;96(1):87–95.
35.
Jia J, Fu J, Zheng J, Zhou X, Huai J,
Wang J, et al. Annotation and expression profile analysis of 2073 full‐length
cDNAs from stress‐induced
maize (Zea mays L.) seedlings. Plant J. 2006;48(5):710–27.
36.
Sekhon RS, Kuldau G, Mansfield M,
Chopra S. Characterization of Fusarium-induced expression of flavonoids and PR
genes in maize. Physiol Mol Plant Pathol. 2006;69(1–3):109–17.
37.
Sels J, Mathys J, De Coninck BM, Cammue
BP, De Bolle MF. Plant pathogenesis-related (PR) proteins: a focus on PR
peptides. Plant Physiol Biochem. 2008;46(11):941–50.
38.
Fountain JC, Koh J, Yang L, Pandey MK,
Nayak SN, Bajaj P, et al. Proteome analysis of Aspergillus flavus
isolate-specific responses to oxidative stress in relationship to aflatoxin
production capability. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):1–14.
39.
Chen Z-Y, Rajasekaran K, Brown RL,
Sayler RJ, Bhatnagar D. Discovery and confirmation of genes/proteins associated
with maize aflatoxin resistance. World Mycotoxin J. 2015;8(2):211–24.
Received: 23 November 2020
Accepted: 20 January 2021
Leandro Balzano, 1; Jesús Alezones, 2;
Nardy Diez García, 3.
1. University of Florida. Department of Microbiology and Cell
Science. Gainesville, United States. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4620-3607
2. Fundación
para la Investigación Agrícola DANAC. Carretera San Javier-Guarataro. Estado
Yaracuy. Venezuela. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9198-492X
3. Centro de Investigación Biotecnológicas del Ecuador
(CIBE), Facultad de Ciencias de la Vida, Escuela Superior Politécnica del
Litoral, ESPOL, Guayaquil, Ecuador.
* Corresponding author: ndiez@espol.edu.ec; +593 98 267 4083. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3561-8815