Next Article in Journal
Entomological Surveillance in Former Malaria-endemic Areas of Southern Italy
Next Article in Special Issue
Suppression of Grape White Rot Caused by Coniella vitis Using the Potential Biocontrol Agent Bacillus velezensis GSBZ09
Previous Article in Journal
Modulation of Production of Th1/Th2 Cytokines in Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells and Neutrophils by Hepatitis C Virus Infection in Chronically Infected Patients
Previous Article in Special Issue
The M35 Metalloprotease Effector FocM35_1 Is Required for Full Virulence of Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. cubense Tropical Race 4
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Pathogens
Volume 10
Issue 11
10.3390/pathogens10111520
pathogens-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Identification and Comparison of Colletotrichum Secreted Effector Candidates Reveal Two Independent Lineages Pathogenic to Soybean

by
Thaís R. Boufleur
1,2,*,
Nelson S. Massola Júnior
1,
Ísis Tikami
1,
Serenella A. Sukno
2,
Michael R. Thon
2 and
Riccardo Baroncelli
2,3,*
1
Luiz de Queiroz College of Agriculture (ESALQ), University of São Paulo (USP), Piracicaba 13418-900, São Paulo, Brazil
2
Department of Microbiology and Genetics, Institute for Agribiotechnology Research (CIALE), University of Salamanca, 37185 Villamayor, Salamanca, Spain
3
Department of Agricultural and Food Sciences (DISTAL), University of Bologna, Viale Fanin 44, 40126 Bologna, Italy
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Pathogens 2021, 10(11), 1520; https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens10111520
Submission received: 18 October 2021 / Revised: 16 November 2021 / Accepted: 18 November 2021 / Published: 21 November 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Fungal Pathogenicity Factors)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Colletotrichum is one of the most important plant pathogenic genus of fungi due to its scientific and economic impact. A wide range of hosts can be infected by Colletotrichum spp., which causes losses in crops of major importance worldwide, such as soybean. Soybean anthracnose is mainly caused by C. truncatum, but other species have been identified at an increasing rate during the last decade, becoming one of the most important limiting factors to soybean production in several regions. To gain a better understanding of the evolutionary origin of soybean anthracnose, we compared the repertoire of effector candidates of four Colletotrichum species pathogenic to soybean and eight species not pathogenic. Our results show that the four species infecting soybean belong to two lineages and do not share any effector candidates. These results strongly suggest that two Colletotrichum lineages have acquired the capability to infect soybean independently. This study also provides, for each lineage, a set of candidate effectors encoding genes that may have important roles in pathogenicity towards soybean offering a new resource useful for further research on soybean anthracnose management.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Due to its agricultural versatility and nutritional content soybean (Glycine max) is the most produced legume worldwide; however, soybean yield is limited by anthracnose, a seed-borne disease caused by Colletotrichum spp. [1,2,3]. Colletotrichum is considered to be the eighth most important group of plant-pathogenic fungi due to its scientific and economic impact [4]. Currently, 257 species of Colletotrichum are accepted and classified into singletons (ST) or species complexes (s.c.) [5].
Since its first report in 1917 [6], C. truncatum has been considered the main species associated with soybean anthracnose, thus, the morphology, life cycle, variability and distribution of the species has been extensively investigated [7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15]. In the past five years, different species associated with the disease were reported, including C. sojae, C. plurivorum and C. musicola, that belong to the C. orchidearum s.c. [16,17,18,19]. A recent review revealed that several Colletotrichum species, belonging to nine s.c. and one ST, have been associated with soybean worldwide and that the C. orchidearum and the C. truncatum s.c. are the most common on symptomatic plants [2].
The evolutionary battle between plants and pathogens is marked by a dispute for survival and adaptation [20,21,22]. This arms race can be partially described by the “zig-zag” model [20], in which a pattern triggered immune response (PTI) is activated after the recognition of pathogen/damage-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs/DAMPs) [20,23,24]. On the other hand, pathogens can bypass this layer of defense by secreting effectors, defined as proteins that interfere in the structure or processes of the host cell, reducing the defense responses and/or improving access to nutrients, allowing the colonization of the host by the pathogen [23]. When pathogen effectors and/or effector targets are detected by the host’s resistance (R) genes the second layer of defense, called effector-triggered immunity (ETI) is activated and can result in a hypersensitive reaction (HR) [21,23]. With the advance of molecular studies, it was shown that the division among PTI and ETI is blurred [24,25,26], and now an integrated plant immune system has been proposed, where a crosstalk between plant immune receptors is essential to both, PTI and ETI achieve its maximum immune response [27].
The increasing need to feed the growing population demands a maximization of production, that is mostly achieved by monoculture. The consequence of this strategy is the homogenization of agricultural environments, that can influence the co-evolutionary arms race among plants and pathogens providing selective advantages to pathogens [28]. In this scenario, the knowledge of the mechanisms involved in the pathogenicity and, the understanding of the differences between different Colletotrichum species is a key step for the development and improvement of soybean anthracnose control strategies.
With the rapid expansions of sequencing technologies and computational tools, the analyses and comparison of whole genomes has become a common practice [29], allowing the establishment of cause and effect correlations among genome features and the biology of plant pathogens [30,31]. To date, 43 genomes of Colletotrichum have been released [32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56] (http://www.colletotrichum.org/genomics/, accessed on 15 November 2012), including the genomes of the soybean pathogenic species C. truncatum, C. musicola, C. plurivorum and C. sojae [54].
It is known that the evolution through adaptation of pathogens to different hosts can involve sets of effectors, that can specialize to infect a specific host [57,58,59,60,61], therefore the evolutionary trajectory of host-pathogen interactions can help to clarify the mechanisms underlying the threat of pathogens to crops [62]. The identification of effector candidates is the first step into the functional characterization of these molecules. Until now, several studies on effectors of different species of Colletotrichum such as C. higginsianum [63,64] C. orbiculare [65,66] C. lentis [67,68,69], C. graminicola [70,71,72] C. simmondsii, C. fiorinae, C. nymphaeae, C. salicis [39], C. lindemunthianum [73], C. falcatum [74], C. fruticola, C. siamense, C. aenigma, C. tropicale, C. viniferum [53] have been published. On the other hand, comparative genomic studies of Colletotrichum spp. that infect soybean have not been performed and the number of candidate effectors of C. truncatum, C. plurivorum, C. musicola and C. sojae, and how many are unique to these species is unknown. A compilation of candidate effectors of those species may help to identify determinants of host specificity in the Colletotrichum-soybean interaction as well as better understanding the mechanisms underlying soybean infection.
To gain a better understanding of the evolutionary origin of soybean anthracnose, we analyzed the repertoire of Lineage Specific Effector Candidates (LSECs) defined as secreted proteins that have no homology to any other protein or that have homology to proteins from other members of the same genus, species or s.c. [39]. We analyzed the proteomes encoded by 12 Colletotrichum species: four pathogenic to soybean (C. truncatum, C. musicola, C. plurivorum and C. sojae), and eight non-pathogenic to this host. To check the intraspecific variability of the identified C. truncatum-LSECs, whole genome data of 18 C. truncatum strains isolated from soybean were assembled and scanned [14]. Moreover, to support our results, RNA-sequencing (RNAseq) data were used to confirm the expression of C. truncatum-LSECs. This work provides a useful platform for future functional studies aimed to clarify the role of Colletotrichum spp. LSECs in soybean anthracnose and shed light, for the first time on the genetic mechanisms of Colletotrichum spp. specialization to soybean.

2. Results

2.1. Among the Selected Colletotrichum Species, Only C. truncatum and Members of the C. orchidearum s.c. Are Pathogenic to Soybean

The pathogenicity of 10 Colletotrichum species selected for comparative genomic analyzes (Table 1) were tested on soybean.
Assays confirmed that only C. truncatum and the three species belonging to the C. orchidearum s.c., C. musicola, C. plurivorum and C. sojae cause anthracnose symptoms in soybean, of which C. truncatum is the most virulent to the tested soybean cultivar (Monsoy IPRO7739) than the three species belonging to the C. orchidearum s.c. (Figure 1). Colletotrichum gloeosporioides, C. higginsianum, C. tofieldiae, C. orchidophilum, C. fioriniae and C. nymphaeae were not pathogenic to soybean (Figure 1).

2.2. The Majority of Candidate Effectors of Colletotrichum Species Are Conserved

To better understand the evolutionary aspects of the two main Colletotrichum s. c. that infect soybean worldwide (C. truncatum s.c. and C. orchidearum s.c.) [2] we conducted in silico analyzes (Figure S1) to check if the representative species of those complexes (C. truncatum, C. musicola, C. plurivorum and C. sojae) share a unique set of effector candidates.
The proteomes of the 12 Colletotrichum species (Table 1) were assigned to 32,018 orthogroups, of which 7428 are shared among all the proteomes analyzed (Figure 2B). Comparative analysis identified 66 orthogroups comprising 338 genes of Colletotrichum spp. common only to the four species infecting soybean, of which only one orthogroup is fully secreted; and 764 orthogroups (2454 genes) shared only between the species belonging to the C. orchidearum s.c., of which eight orthogroups are secreted. While 1214 (1695 genes); 1103 (1126 genes); 760 (771 genes) and 943 (952 genes) orthogroups were specific to C. truncatum, C. musicola, C. plurivorum and C. sojae, respectively (Figure 2C).
The proteomes of the four soybean infecting species of Colletotrichum were scanned for the presence of signal peptides, transmembrane (TM)-domains, and glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI)-anchors. For further analyses, the secretome of each Colletotrichum species was defined based on those proteins with a predicted signal peptide, and absence of TM domains [78] and GPI-anchors. The secretomes of the four species vary between 9–10%, being 1638; 1485; 1495; and 1447 proteins for C. truncatum, C. musicola, C. plurivorum and C. sojae respectively (Table 2).
Our results revealed that most of the effector candidates of the four Colletotrichum species pathogenic to soybean are present in other microorganisms, corresponding to 80% of C. truncatum, 84% of C. musicola, 83%, of C. plurivorum and 85% of C. sojae. While around 15% of the effector candidates of each species are shared only among the Colletotrichum genus (Figure 3). LSECs, with no similarity inside or outside the genus Colletotrichum were identified, among those, 11 C. orchidearum-LSECs in C. plurivorum, 13 C. orchidearum-LSECs in C. musicola; and 16 C. orchidearum-LSECs in C. sojae. We also identified 40 C. truncatum-LSECs, 15 C. musicola-LSECs, eight C. plurivorum-LSECs and nine C. sojae-LSECs. Host-LSECs shared only between the four Colletotrichum species that infect soybean were not identified (Figure 3, Table S1). The corresponding orthogroups of all the sets of s.c. and species-LSECs aforementioned were assigned to their corresponding orthogroups based on the similarity analysis of the proteins (Table S1).
The absence of similarity to proteins with a known function is a common characteristic to effector proteins [78]. All the LSECs were scanned with RunIprScan (http://michaelrthon.com/runiprscan/, accessed on 15 February 2021) to identify conserved domains and submitted to a BLAST against the non-redundant database Pathogen Host Interactions-base (PHI-base) to check the similarity with known genes of other microorganism species. All LSECs of the four Colletotrichum spp. pathogenic to soybean do not have any known domain or similarity in PHI-base (Table S1).
We scanned the C. orchidearum s.c. and species-LSECs for characteristics commonly observed in effector proteins, such as a high percentage of cysteines (cysteine-rich), with >2% of cysteines in their amino acid sequences [79], repeat-containing proteins [80] and the predicted translocation to different subcellular compartments of the plant cell, such as the chloroplast or mitochondria when they have a transit peptide, to the plant cell nucleus, when they possess nuclear localization signals (NLS) [81] or are delivered to the plant apoplast [82]. All C. orchidearum-LSECs, have at least one of the above-mentioned characteristics, from those, six; five; and five LSECs were predicted as effectors by EffectorP 2.0 tool for C. musicola, C. plurivorum, and C. sojae. Among the species-LSECs, 11 C. musicola, seven of C. plurivorum and eight of C. sojae have at least one of these characteristics, of which five, two and three were predicted to be effectors by EffectorP 2.0 tool. Among the C. truncatum-LSECs, 34 were predicted to have at least one of those characteristics, being 16 of them predicted by EffectorP 2.0 (Table 3 and Table S1).

2.3. C. truncatum LSECs Are Expressed and Have Evolutionary Evidence

To confirm the expression of C. truncatum-LSECs in vitro and in soybean during the infection by C. truncatum, samples were collected for RNA sequencing at 12;48 and 120 hpi, and 21 cDNA libraries were sequenced. A total of 1,202,535,286 raw reads were generated by Illumina HiSeq4000 sequencing. Overall, from 0.02 to 7.56% of the paired-end reads were mapped to the C. truncatum genome. 18 C. truncatum LSECs have evidence of expression in planta and/or in vitro. From those, nine are evolutionarily conserved in 18 C. truncatum genomes pathogenic to soybean. Another eight C. truncatum LSECs are conserved but are not expressed (Figure 4).

3. Discussion

The availability of four representative Colletotrichum genomes of the C. truncatum s.c. and C. orchidearum s.c. [54] reported as the most distributed s.c. associated with soybean worldwide [2], along with the genomes of several Colletotrichum species associated with other hosts [32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55], allowed us to investigate the evolutionary origin of soybean anthracnose, by looking at the repertoire of effector candidates of each species and comparing them with the proteomes of eight additional Colletotrichum species non-pathogenic to soybean.
Effectors proteins produced by plant pathogens are secreted proteins, many of which translocated to the apoplast or cytoplasm of the host, where they alter the host defense responses to allow colonization by the pathogen [23,83]. Prediction of effector proteins from proteomes of Colletotrichum species has revealed different sets of effector candidates [42,56,69,75]. The evolution of effector proteins rely on the arms-race between plants and pathogens, with the aim of escape detection and evolve the capability of cause disease in different hosts [30], therefore the pathogenicity to specific hosts and/or cultivars can be a result of the evolution of effector proteins from a common ancestor [84,85], as shown for the hemibiotrophic pathogen Phythophthora infestans [21], Venturia spp. [86] and Ceratocystis spp. [87]. Our results revealed effector candidates for the four species pathogenic to soybean. Most of the C. orchidearum s.c. and species-LSECs are predicted to be secreted to the plant apoplast, while only a few genes are predicted to be localized to the plant cell nucleus or other subcellular compartments (Table 3 and Table S1). These results suggest that the initial contact with the host is determinant for the capability of Colletotrichum species to infect soybean.
Initial pathogenicity tests revealed that among the tested Colletotrichum isolates, only the four Colletotrichum species previously associated with soybean [6,16,17,18] were pathogenic to the evaluated soybean cultivar. The three species that belong to the C. orchidearum s.c. showed a similar level of virulence, and lower than the level of virulence of C. truncatum. In another study, the virulence of one isolate of C. plurivorum was compared with five isolates of C. truncatum, and overall, the isolate was less virulent than at least one isolate of C. truncatum in soybean pods, stems and cotyledons, moreover, the authors reported that pod twisting symptoms were only caused by C. plurivorum, when the same stage of soybean development was compared after inoculation with C. truncatum [88].
While C. truncatum has been associated with soybean since 1917 [6], C. musicola, C. plurivorum and C. sojae were detected in soybean fields only recently [16,17,18]. Studies have revealed that the C. orchidearum s.c. has been misidentified at least since 2003, being C. truncatum and C. orchidearum s.c. the most associated with soybean until now [2]. Our results show that the four species that infect soybean belong to two lineages and do not share any of the identified LSECs. Moreover, the estimated divergence time of the C. truncatum s.c. occurred around 22.9 million years ago (mya), while the C. orchidearum s.c diverged 4.8 mya [89], both of them before the domestication of soybean, that occurred 3000 years ago in China [90]. This evolutionary evidence, along with experimental data and the absence of host-LSECs shared only among the four species of Colletotrichum that infect soybean, strongly suggests that the two main Colletotrichum lineages associated with soybean have acquired the capability to infect soybean independently. Currently, C. truncatum is the most important species associated with soybean anthracnose worldwide [8,91], therefore, we checked if the C. truncatum-LSECs are conserved in 18 additional C. truncatum genomes pathogenic to soybean. Our results revealed that 17 C. truncatum genes have evolutionary evidence of being conserved among the species. This suggests that those effectors might play a role in the virulence of C. truncatum to soybean, as microorganisms do not keep useless genes due the high fitness costs of maintaining effector alleles [62,92]. Additionally to in silico prediction based genome sequences, an initial list of effector candidates can be narrowed down based on their expression [78]. 18 C. truncatum-LSECs have evidence of expression in soybean and/or in vitro. The low coverage of RNAseq data was a limiting factor for the analysis of gene expression, therefore LSECs without evidence of expression should not be excluded from the initial dataset and be further investigated.
The identification of sets of LSECs of the C. orchidearum s.c. and C. truncatum open the field to perform evaluations of the functional role of these genes in soybean infection. Besides cultural and chemical control strategies that have already been described for soybean anthracnose, recent outbreaks of the disease have been reported by researchers and producers [8,14,88], suggesting that the control strategies used are not always effective. This may be a consequence of different Colletotrichum species present in soybean fields, that allied to the suggestion of separate evolution of these species, may imply directly in disease management strategies, as the correct identification of the causal agent is crucial to an efficient control strategy [93,94].

4. Conclusions

This work sheds light on the evolutionary aspects of Colletotrichum spp. associated with soybean anthracnose. Our results suggest that there are at least two distinct lineages that evolved the capability to infect soybean independently. These results are supported by the identification of different sets of LSECs in all the four species compared, and the absence of shared genes only among the four species that infect soybean. Moreover, the level of virulence of species of the C. orchidearum s.c. is lower when compared to C. orchidearum. We confirmed that 42% of C. truncatum-LSECs are conserved in 18 re-sequenced genomes, while 25% of those also have evidence of expression in planta and/or in vitro. The presence of isolate-SECs with evidence of in planta expression opens new perspectives linking these loci with virulence.
Recent outbreaks of the disease reported by researchers and producers [14,91,95] suggest that the cultural and chemical strategies that have been used to control soybean anthracnose are not always effective. This may be related to the different lineages of Colletotrichum present in soybean fields. Evolutionarily distinct lineages may require the application of multiple and specific disease management strategies.
A platform of LSECs of C. truncatum, C. plurivorum, C. sojae and C. musicola is now provided. These loci can be used for functional studies and, once their function has been confirmed, as targets for breeding programs.

5. Materials and Methods

5.1. Fungal Strains Used

Twelve Colletotrichum species were selected for comparative genomic analyses (Table 1). From those, four are pathogenic to soybean, including C. musicola, C. plurivorum and C. sojae, part of the C. orchidearum s.c. and C. truncatum; while the other eight, including: C. orbiculare, C. gloeosporioides sensu lato, C. higginsianum, C. tofieldiae, C. graminicola, C. orchidophilum, C. fioriniae and C. nymphaeae, are pathogenic to other hosts (Table 1).

5.2. Pathogenicity Assays

Pathogenicity assays were performed to confirm the capability of the selected Colletotrichum strains to cause soybean anthracnose (Table 1). For sporulation, strains were cultured on Potato Dextrose Agar (PDA) medium (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA) for 15 days at 25 °C and conidia suspensions were prepared and adjusted to 1 × 106 conidia/mL.
Soybean seeds of the IPRO7739 cultivar (Monsoy company, São Paulo, Brazil), were superficially disinfected for 1 min into a 1% NaClO solution, rinsed three times in sterile distilled water (SDW) and placed in Petri dishes containing 100 g of sterile sand, soaked with 10 mL of SDW. Seeds were incubated in the dark for 32 h at 25 °C.
Conidia suspensions of each Colletotrichum strain were placed on five germinated seeds as described previously [96]. SDW was used as a negative control. Inoculated seedlings were incubated for 4 h, transferred to pots filled with vermiculite and transferred to a greenhouse for 7 days. The virulence of Colletotrichum strains was evaluated using an adapted diagrammatic scale that ranges from 0 to 5 [15]. Severity data were analyzed with the post-hoc Tukey method at 0.05 significance level, using the ExpDes R package (v.1.2.0) (Alfenas, Brazil).

5.3. Identification of Specific Effector Protein Candidates (SECs) of Soybean Pathogenic Colletotrichum Species

The proteomes of four Colletotrichum species pathogenic to soybean, and eight non-pathogenic species were analyzed (Table 1). A phylogeny of the 12 selected proteomes was reconstructed based on the combined actin (ACT), chitin synthase (CHS) and glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH). Verticillium dahliae (VdLs.17) was used as an outgroup. Random trees were sampled every 1000 generations, and the analyses were run for 5,000,000 generations using MrBayes (v. 3.2.7) (Oxford, England). The predicted proteomes of the 12 Colletotrichum spp. were clustered based on similarity with OrthoFinder (v.2.3.5) (Oxford, England) [95] and the clusters of proteins were visualized with the R package UpsetR (v.1.4.0) [97] to identify shared and specific orthogroups between the species and s.c.
To predict the set of effector candidates of C. truncatum, C. musicola, C. plurivorum and C. sojae, publicly available proteomes were used [54]. Proteins containing a signal peptide cleavage site were predicted with SignalP (v.5.0) (Lingby, Denmark) [98], then sequences containing TM-domains and GPI-anchors were identified using THMMM (v.2.0) (Lingby, Denmark) [99] and PredGPI (http://gpcr.biocomp.unibo.it/predgpi/, accessed on 20 February 2021) [100]. The initial set of effector candidates for each species of Colletotrichum included those proteins that are predicted to have a signal peptide cleavage site, no TM-domains and no GPI-anchors.
The set of effector candidates of each Colletotrichum species was submitted individually to a series of BLAST searches with an e-value cutoff of 1E-5 and classified into shared (proteins with homology to proteins from other members of the genus Colletotrichum), s.c. specific (those that had homology only within other species from the same s.c.), host-specific (shared only between the four species that infect soybean) and species-specific (those that had no homology to any other protein either within or outside of the same genus) LSECs [39]. The final set of predicted LSECs was scanned with RunIprScan (http://michaelrthon.com/runiprscan/, accessed on 15 February 2021) to identify conserved domains and submitted to a BLAST search against the non-redundant database (nr db) of NCBI and PHI-base to check the similarity with known genes of other microorganism species; being considered conserved those proteins with similarity outside the genus Colletotrichum.
Species-specific and species complex LSECs were characterized. For the prediction of subcellular localization within the plant cell, mature protein sequences were submitted to LOCALIZER (http://localizer.csiro.au/, accessed on 24 February 2021) [81], and to the prediction of apoplastic LSECs, the proteins were submitted to ApoplastP (http://apoplastp.csiro.au/, accessed on 24 February 2021) [82]. The percentage of cysteines was identified in Geneious (v.2020.10.4) (San Diego, CA, USA) and repeat-containing proteins were predicted using T-REKs [101].

5.4. Genome Assembly and Gene Evolution

To check if C. truncatum-LSECs are conserved among the species, Illumina reads of 18 C. truncatum strains available in NCBI (Table 4) were trimmed with Trim Galore (v.0.4.5) (Cambridge, UK) Forward and reverse reads were merged using Flash (v.1.2.7) (Baltimore, MD, USA) [102]. Assemblies of combined and uncombined reads were performed with SPAdes v.3.13.1 [103] (St. Peterspurg, Russia) using the C. truncatum CMES1059 strain genome as a reference.

5.5. Evidence of Expression of C. truncatum by RNAseq

To confirm evidence of gene expression of C. truncatum in planta, five pre-germinated seeds of soybean cultivars IPRO7739 and IPRO8372 (Monsoy company, São Paulo, Brazil) were inoculated with C. truncatum (CMES1059) strain as described in 5.2. Hypocotyls fragments of 0.5 cm of five randomly selected plants were collected and pooled together at 12; 48 and 120 hpi. To confirm evidence of expression of C. truncatum in vitro, 100 mL of potato dextrose liquid culture was inoculated with C. truncatum conidia in 250 mL Erlenmeyer flasks at 25 °C, shaken at 150 rpm. After 120 hpi micelia was collected by filtration and washed with SDW. Harvested plant tissue and fungal micelia was flash-frozen in liquid N2 and stored at −80 °C until RNA extraction. Three biological replicates of the experiment were performed. The collected material was ground using mortar and pestle and total RNA was purified using PureLink RNA Mini Kit (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA, USA) following the manufacturer-s instructions. Total RNA was treated with RNAse-free DNAse (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) to remove DNA contamination. The quantity of total RNA was estimated using Qubit 2.0 flurometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) and RNA integrity was checked using Agilent TapeStation 4200 (Agilent Technologies, Palo Alto, CA, USA).
Total extracted RNA was sent to Genewiz (South Plainfield, NJ, USA) for Illumina sequencing. In total, 21 libraries derived from all the treatments were prepared using NEBNext Ultra RNA Library Prep Kit for Illumina (NEB, Ipswich, MA, USA) using manufacturer’s instructions. Sequencing libraries were validated on the Agilent TapeStation (Agilent technologies, Palo Alto, CA, USA) and quantified in Qubit 2.0 fluorometer (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA, USA) and by quantitative PCR (Kapa Biosystems, Wilmington, NC, USA). Libraries were sequenced using Illumina HiSeq4000 (2 × 150 bp) (Illumina, San Diego, CA, USA).
The quality of reads was accessed using FastQC (v.0.11.7) (Cambridge, UK) and clean reads were obtained by removing reads containing adapters with CutAdaptors (v.1.9.1) (Uppsala, Sweden). Paired-end clean reads were mapped against the C. truncatum CMES1059 reference genome [54] using HISAT (v.2.1.0) (Baltimore, MD, USA). Alignments from each library were processed with StringTIE (v.1.3.5) (Baltimore, MD, USA) to quantify expression values of transcripts.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/pathogens10111520/s1. Figure S1: In silico analysis workflow for the prediction of effector candidates in C. truncatum, C. musicola, C. plurivorum and C. sojae. Table S1: Lineage Specific Effector Candidates (LSECs) of C. truncatum, C. musicola, C. plurivorum and C. sojae.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.B. and T.R.B.; methodology, T.R.B. and R.B.; formal analysis, T.R.B.; investigation, T.R.B., R.B., S.A.S., M.R.T., Í.T., N.S.M.J., M.R.T.; resources, N.S.M.J.; data curation, T.R.B., R.B.; writing—original draft preparation, T.R.B.; writing—review and editing, R.B., N.S.M.J., Í.T., S.A.S., M.R.T.; supervision, R.B., N.S.M.J., M.R.T.; funding acquisition, N.S.M.J. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by FUNDAÇÃO DE AMPARO À PESQUISA DO ESTADO DE SÃO PAULO—FAPESP, grant number 2017/09178-8, and NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION—CAPES grant number 88887.368016/2019-00, National Science and Technology Development Council (CNPq) grant number 305289/2018-7 and the Ministerio de Ciencia and Innovación of Spain (grant RTI2018-093611-B-I00).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

All the data analyzed in this work are publicly available at NCBI (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ accessed on 15 November 2020) under the accession numbers: C. orbiculare (AMCV00000000.1), C. musicola (WIGM00000000), C. plurivorum (WIGO00000000), C. sojae (WIGN00000000), C. truncatum (VUJX00000000.1), C. gloeosporioides (AMYD00000000.1), C. higginssianum (LTAN00000000.1), C. tofieldiae (LFHQ00000000.1), C. graminicola (ACOD00000000.1), C. orchidophilum (MJBS00000000.1), C. fiorineae (JARH00000000.1), C. nymphaeae (JEMN00000000.1).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Hartman, G.L.; West, E.D.; Herman, T.K. Crops That Feed the World 2. Soybean—Worldwide Production. Food Sec. 2011, 3, 5–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Boufleur, T.R.; Ciampi-Guillardi, M.; Tikami, I.; Rogério, F.; Thon, M.R.; Sukno, S.A.; Massola Júnior, N.S.; Baroncelli, R. Soybean Anthracnose Caused by Colletotrichum Species: Curr. Status and Future Prospects. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Dias, M.D.; Pinheiro, V.F.; Café-Filho, A.C. Impact of Anthracnose on the Yield of Soybean Subjected to Chemical Control in the North Region of Brazil. Summa Phytopathol. 2016, 42, 18–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Dean, R.; Van Kan, J.A.L.; Pretorius, Z.A.; Hammond-Kosack, K.E.; Di Pietro, A.; Spanu, P.D.; Rudd, J.J.; Dickman, M.; Kahmann, R.; Ellis, J.; et al. The Top 10 Fungal Pathogens in Mol. Plant Pathol.: Top 10 Fungal Pathogens. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2012, 13, 414–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Talhinhas, P.; Baroncelli, R. Colletotrichum Species and Complexes: Geographic Distribution, Host Range and Conservation Status. Fungal Divers. 2021, 110, 109–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Nakata, K.; Takimoto, K. A List of Crop Diseases in Korea; Agricultural experiment station governmental central chosen research report; Korean Society of Plant Pathology: Seoul, Korea, 1934; pp. 1–146. [Google Scholar]
  7. Chen, S.; Wang, Y.; Schnabel, G.; Peng, C.A.; Lagishetty, S.; Smith, K.; Luo, C.; Yuan, H. Inherent Resistance to 14α-Demethylation Inhibitor Fungicides in Colletotrichum truncatum Is Likely Linked to CYP51A and/or CYP51B Gene Variants. Phytopathology 2018, 108, 1263–1275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  8. Rogério, F.; Ciampi-Guillardi, M.; Barbieri, M.C.G.; Bragança, C.A.D.; Seixas, C.D.S.; Almeida, A.M.R.; Massola, N.S. Phylogeny and Variability of Colletotrichum truncatum Associated with Soybean Anthracnose in Brazil. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2017, 122, 402–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  9. Ciampi-Guillardi, M.; Ramiro, J.; de Moraes, M.H.D.; Barbieri, M.C.G.; Massola, N.S. Multiplex QPCR Assay for Direct Detection and Quantification of Colletotrichum truncatum, Corynespora cassiicola, and Sclerotinia sclerotiorum in Soybean Seeds. Plant Dis. 2020, 104, 3002–3009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Damm, U.; Woudenberg, J.H.C.; Cannon, P.F.; Crous, P.W. Colletotrichum Species with Curved Conidia from Herbaceous Hosts. Fungal Divers. 2009, 39, 45–87. [Google Scholar]
  11. Dias, M.D.; Dias-Neto, J.J.; Santos, M.D.M.; Formento, A.N.; Bizerra, L.V.A.S.; Fonseca, M.E.N.; Boiteux, L.S.; Café-Filho, A.C. Curr. Status of Soybean Anthracnose Associated with Colletotrichum truncatum in Brazil and Argentina. Plants 2019, 8, 459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Nataraj, V.; Maranna, S.; Kumawat, G.; Gupta, S.; Rajput, L.S.; Kumar, S.; Sharma, A.N.; Bhatia, V.S. Genetic Inheritance and Identification of Germplasm Sources for Anthracnose Resistance in Soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.]. Genet. Resour. Crop Evol. 2020, 67, 1449–1456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Poti, T.; Mahawan, K.; Cheewangkoon, R.; Arunothayanan, H.; Akimitsu, K.; Nalumpang, S. Detection and Mol. Characterization of Carbendazim-Resistant Colletotrichum truncatum Isolates Causing Anthracnose of Soybean in Thailand. J. Phytopathol. 2020, 168, 267–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Rogério, F.; Gladieux, P.; Massola, N.S.; Ciampi-Guillardi, M. Multiple Introductions without Admixture of Colletotrichum truncatum Associated with Soybean Anthracnose in Brazil. Phytopathology 2019, 109, 681–689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Yang, H.-C.; Haudenshield, J.S.; Hartman, G.L. Multiplex Real-Time PCR Detection and Differentiation of Colletotrichum Species Infecting Soybean. Plant Dis. 2015, 99, 1559–1568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Boufleur, T.R.; Castro, R.R.L.; Rogério, F.; Ciampi-Guillardi, M.; Baroncelli, R.; Massola Júnior, N.S. First Report of Colletotrichum musicola Causing Soybean Anthracnose in Brazil. Plant Dis. 2020, 104, 1858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Barbieri, M.C.G.; Ciampi-Guillardi, M.; Moraes, S.R.G.; Bonaldo, S.M.; Rogério, F.; Linhares, R.R.; Massola, N.S. First Report of Colletotrichum cliviae Causing Anthracnose on Soybean in Brazil. Plant Dis. 2017, 101, 1677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Damm, U.; Sato, T.; Alizadeh, A.; Groenewald, J.Z.; Crous, P.W. The Colletotrichum dracaenophilum, C. magnum and C. orchidearum Species Complexes. Stud. Mycol. 2019, 92, 1–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Shi, X.-C.; Wang, S.-Y.; Duan, X.-C.; Gao, X.; Zhu, X.-Y.; Laborda, P. First Report of Colletotrichum Brevisporum Causing Soybean Anthracnose in China. Plant Dis. 2020, 105, 707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Jones, J.D.G.; Dangl, J.L. The Plant Immune System. Nature 2006, 444, 323–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  21. Dong, S.; Stam, R.; Cano, L.M.; Song, J.; Sklenar, J.; Yoshida, K.; Bozkurt, T.O.; Oliva, R.; Liu, Z.; Tian, M.; et al. Effector Specialization in a Lineage of the Irish Potato Famine Pathogen. Science 2014, 343, 552–555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Dong, S.; Raffaele, S.; Kamoun, S. The Two-Speed Genomes of Filamentous Pathogens: Waltz with Plants. Curr. Opin. Genet. Devel. 2015, 35, 57–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Win, J.; Chaparro-Garcia, A.; Belhaj, K.; Saunders, D.G.O.; Yoshida, K.; Dong, S.; Schornack, S.; Zipfel, C.; Robatzek, S.; Hogenhout, S.A.; et al. Effector Biol. of Plant-Associated Organisms: Concepts and Perspectives. Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol. 2012, 77, 235–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Kanyuka, K.; Rudd, J.J. Cell Surface Immune Receptors: The Guardians of the Plant’s Extracellular Spaces. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2019, 50, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Yuan, M.; Jiang, Z.; Bi, G.; Nomura, K.; Liu, M.; Wang, Y.; Cai, B.; Zhou, J.-M.; He, S.Y.; Xin, X.-F. Pattern-Recognition Receptors Are Required for NLR-Mediated Plant Immunity. Nature 2021, 592, 105–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Ngou, B.P.M.; Ahn, H.-K.; Ding, P.; Jones, J.D.G. Mutual Potentiation of Plant Immunity by Cell-Surface and Intracellular Receptors. Nature 2021, 592, 110–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Bjornson, M.; Zipfel, C. Plant Immunity: Crosstalk between Plant Immune Receptors. Curr. Biol. 2021, 31, R796–R798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Zhan, J.; Thrall, P.H.; Burdon, J.J. Achieving Sustainable Plant Dis. Management through Evolutionary Principles. Trends Plant Sci. 2014, 19, 570–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Raffaele, S.; Kamoun, S. Genome Evolution in Filamentous Plant Pathogens: Why Bigger Can Be Better. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2012, 10, 417–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Lo Presti, L.; Lanver, D.; Schweizer, G.; Tanaka, S.; Liang, L.; Tollot, M.; Zuccaro, A.; Reissmann, S.; Kahmann, R. Fungal Effectors and Plant Susceptibility. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2015, 66, 513–545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Plissonneau, C.; Benevenuto, J.; Mohd-Assaad, N.; Fouché, S.; Hartmann, F.E.; Croll, D. Using Population and Comparative Genomics to Understand the Genetic Basis of Effector-Driven Fungal Pathogen Evolution. Front. Plant Sci. 2017, 8, 119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. O’Connell, R.J.; Thon, M.R.; Hacquard, S.; Amyotte, S.G.; Kleemann, J.; Torres, M.F.; Damm, U.; Buiate, E.A.; Epstein, L.; Alkan, N.; et al. Lifestyle Transitions in Plant Pathogenic Colletotrichum Fungi Deciphered by Genome and Transcriptome Analyses. Nat. Genet. 2012, 44, 1060–1065. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Gan, P.; Ikeda, K.; Irieda, H.; Narusaka, M.; O’Connell, R.J.; Narusaka, Y.; Takano, Y.; Kubo, Y.; Shirasu, K. Comparative Genomic and Transcriptomic Analyses Reveal the Hemibiotrophic Stage Shift of Colletotrichum Fungi. New Phytol. 2013, 197, 1236–1249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Alkan, N.; Friedlander, G.; Ment, D.; Prusky, D.; Fluhr, R. Simultaneous Transcriptome Analysis of Colletotrichum gloeosporioides and Tomato Fruit Pathosystem Reveals Novel Fungal Pathogenicity and Fruit Defense Strategies. New Phytol. 2015, 205, 801–815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Huo, J.; Wang, Y.; Hao, Y.; Yao, Y.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, K.; Tan, X.; Li, Z.; Wang, W. Genome Sequence Resource for Colletotrichum scovillei, the Cause of Anthracnose Disease of Chili. MPMI 2021, 34, 122–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Eaton, M.J.; Edwards, S.; Inocencio, H.A.; Machado, F.J.; Nuckles, E.M.; Farman, M.; Gauthier, N.A.; Vaillancourt, L.J. Diversity and Cross-Infection Potential of Colletotrichum Causing Fruit Rots in Mixed-Fruit Orchards in Kentucky. Plant Dis. 2021, 105, 1115–1128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Liu, X.; Li, B.; Yang, Y.; Cai, J.; Shi, T.; Zheng, X.; Huang, G. Pathogenic Adaptations Revealed by Comparative Genome Analyses of Two Colletotrichum Spp., the Causal Agent of Anthracnose in Rubber Tree. Front. Microbiol. 2020, 11, 1484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Baroncelli, R.; Sreenivasaprasad, S.; Sukno, S.A.; Thon, M.R.; Holub, E. Draft Genome Sequence of Colletotrichum scutatum sensu lato (Colletotrichum fioriniae). Genome Announc. 2014, 2, e00112-14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Baroncelli, R.; Amby, D.B.; Zapparata, A.; Sarrocco, S.; Vannacci, G.; Le Floch, G.; Harrison, R.J.; Holub, E.; Sukno, S.A.; Sreenivasaprasad, S.; et al. Gene Family Expansions and Contractions Are Associated with Host Range in Plant Pathogens of the Genus Colletotrichum. BMC Genom. 2016, 17, 555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Gan, P.; Narusaka, M.; Kumakura, N.; Tsushima, A.; Takano, Y.; Narusaka, Y.; Shirasu, K. Genus-Wide Comparative Genome Analyses of Colletotrichum Species Reveal Specific Gene Family Losses and Gains during Adaptation to Specific Infection Lifestyles. Genome Biol. Evol. 2016, 8, 1467–1481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Hacquard, S.; Kracher, B.; Hiruma, K.; Münch, P.C.; Garrido-Oter, R.; Thon, M.R.; Weimann, A.; Damm, U.; Dallery, J.-F.; Hainaut, M.; et al. Survival Trade-Offs in Plant Roots during Colonization by Closely Related Beneficial and Pathogenic Fungi. Nat. Commun. 2016, 7, 11362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Viswanathan, R.; Prasanth, C.N.; Malathi, P.; Sundar, A.R. Draft Genome Sequence of Colletotrichum Falcatum-a Prelude on Screening of Red Rot Pathogen in Sugarcane. J. Genom. 2016, 4, 1–3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Han, J.-H.; Chon, J.-K.; Ahn, J.-H.; Choi, I.-Y.; Lee, Y.-H.; Kim, K.S. Whole Genome Sequence and Genome Annotation of Colletotrichum Acutatum, Causal Agent of Anthracnose in Pepper Plants in South Korea. Genom. Data 2016, 8, 45–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  44. Dallery, J.-F.; Lapalu, N.; Zampounis, A.; Pigné, S.; Luyten, I.; Amselem, J.; Wittenberg, A.H.J.; Zhou, S.; de Queiroz, M.V.; Robin, G.P.; et al. Gapless Genome Assembly of Colletotrichum higginsianum Reveals Chromosome Structure and Association of Transposable Elements with Secondary Metabolite Gene Clusters. BMC Genom. 2017, 18, 667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Baroncelli, R.; Sukno, S.A.; Sarrocco, S.; Cafà, G.; Le Floch, G.; Thon, M.R. Whole-Genome Sequence of the Orchid Anthracnose Pathogen Colletotrichum orchidophilum. MPMI 2018, 31, 979–981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  46. Gan, P.; Narusaka, M.; Tsushima, A.; Narusaka, Y.; Takano, Y.; Shirasu, K. Draft Genome Assembly of Colletotrichum chlorophyti, a Pathogen of Ehbaceous Plants. Genome Announc. 2017, 5, e01733-16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Gan, P.; Tsushima, A.; Narusaka, M.; Narusaka, Y.; Takano, Y.; Kubo, Y.; Shirasu, K. Genome Sequence Resources for Four Phytopathogenic Fungi from the Colletotrichum orbiculare Species Complex. MPMI 2019, 32, 1088–1090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Nakamura, M.; Fujikawa, T.; Nakamori, D.; Iwai, H. Draft Genome Sequence of Colletotrichum sansevieriae Sa-1–2, the Anthracnose Pathogen of Sansevieria trifasciata. Data Brief 2018, 18, 691–695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Bhadauria, V.; MacLachlan, R.; Pozniak, C.; Cohen-Skalie, A.; Li, L.; Halliday, J.; Banniza, S. Genetic Map-Guided Genome Assembly Reveals a Virulence-Governing Minichromosome in the Lentil Anthracnose Pathogen Colletotrichum lentis. New Phytol. 2019, 221, 431–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. da Silva Junior, W.J.; Falcão, R.M.; de Sousa-Paula, L.C.; Sbaraini, N.; dos Santos Vieira, W.A.; Lima, W.G.; Junior, S.D.S.L.P.; Staats, C.C.; Schrank, A.; Benko-Iseppon, A.M.; et al. Draft Genome Assembly of Colletotrichum musae, the Pathogen of Banana Fruit. Data Brief 2018, 17, 256–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Lelwala, R.V.; Korhonen, P.K.; Young, N.D.; Scott, J.B.; Ades, P.K.; Gasser, R.B.; Taylor, P.W.J. Comparative Genome Analysis Indicates High Evolutionary Potential of Pathogenicity Genes in Colletotrichum tanaceti. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0212248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Gan, P.; Tsushima, A.; Hiroyama, R.; Narusaka, M.; Takano, Y.; Narusaka, Y.; Kawaradani, M.; Damm, U.; Shirasu, K. Colletotrichum shisoi Sp. Nov., an Anthracnose Pathogen of Perilla frutescens in Japan: Mol. Phylogenetic, Morphological and Genomic Evidence. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 13349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Gan, P.; Hiroyama, R.; Tsushima, A.; Masuda, S.; Shibata, A.; Ueno, A.; Kumakura, N.; Narusaka, M.; Hoat, T.X.; Narusaka, Y.; et al. Telomeres and a Repeat-rich Chromosome Encode Effector Gene Clusters in Plant Pathogenic Colletotrichum Fungi. Environ. Microbiol. 2021, 23, 6004–6018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Rogério, F.; Boufleur, T.R.; Ciampi-Guillardi, M.; Sukno, S.A.; Thon, M.R.; Massola Júnior, N.S.; Baroncelli, R. Genome Sequence Resources of Colletotrichum truncatum, C. Plurivorum, C. musicola, and C. sojae: Four Species Pathogenic to Soybean (Glycine max). Phytopathology 2020, 110, 1497–1499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Meng, Y.; Ren, Y.; Wang, W.; Gleason, M.L.; Zhang, R.; Sun, G. A Genome Sequence Resource for the Geographically Widespread Anthracnose Pathogen Colletotrichum asianum. Plant Dis. 2020, 104, 2044–2047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Baroncelli, R.; Pensec, F.; Da Lio, D.; Boufleur, T.R.; Vicente, I.; Sarrocco, S.; Picot, A.; Baraldi, E.; Sukno, S.; Thon, M.R.; et al. Complete Genome Sequence of the Plant Pathogenic Fungus Colletotrichum lupini. MPMI 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Ma, L.-J.; van der Does, H.C.; Borkovich, K.A.; Coleman, J.J.; Daboussi, M.-J.; Di Pietro, A.; Dufresne, M.; Freitag, M.; Grabherr, M.; Henrissat, B.; et al. Comparative Genomics Reveals Mobile Pathogenicity Chromosomes in Fusarium. Nature 2010, 464, 367–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Poppe, S.; Dorsheimer, L.; Happel, P.; Stukenbrock, E.H. Rapidly Evolving Genes Are Key Players in Host Specialization and Virulence of the Fungal Wheat Pathogen Zymoseptoria tritici (Mycosphaerella graminicola). PLoS Pathog. 2015, 11, e1005055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Petre, B.; Lorrain, C.; Stukenbrock, E.H.; Duplessis, S. Host-Specialized Transcriptome of Plant-Associated Organisms. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2020, 56, 81–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Palma-Guerrero, J.; Ma, X.; Torriani, S.F.F.; Zala, M.; Francisco, C.S.; Hartmann, F.E.; Croll, D.; McDonald, B.A. Comparative Transcriptome Analyses in Zymoseptoria tritici Reveal Significant Differences in Gene Expression among Strains during Plant Infection. MPMI 2017, 30, 231–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  61. Liao, J.; Huang, H.; Meusnier, I.; Adreit, H.; Ducasse, A.; Bonnot, F.; Pan, L.; He, X.; Kroj, T.; Fournier, E.; et al. Pathogen Effectors and Plant Immunity Determine Specialization of the Blast Fungus to Rice Subspecies. eLife 2016, 5, e19377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Sánchez-Vallet, A.; Fouché, S.; Fudal, I.; Hartmann, F.E.; Soyer, J.L.; Tellier, A.; Croll, D. The Genome Biol. of Effector Gene Evolution in Filamentous Plant Pathogens. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 2018, 56, 21–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Kleemann, J.; Rincon-Rivera, L.J.; Takahara, H.; Neumann, U.; Ver Loren van Themaat, E.; van der Does, H.C.; Hacquard, S.; Stüber, K.; Will, I.; Schmalenbach, W.; et al. Correction: Sequential Delivery of Host-Induced Virulence Effectors by Appressoria and Intracellular Hyphae of the Phytopathogen Colletotrichum higginsianum. PLoS Pathog. 2012, 8, e1002643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Robin, G.P.; Kleemann, J.; Neumann, U.; Cabre, L.; Dallery, J.-F.; Lapalu, N.; O’Connell, R.J. Subcellular Localization Screening of Colletotrichum higginsianum Effector Candidates Identifies Fungal Proteins Targeted to Plant Peroxisomes, Golgi Bodies, and Microtubules. Front. Plant Sci. 2018, 9, 562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  65. Irieda, H.; Maeda, H.; Akiyama, K.; Hagiwara, A.; Saitoh, H.; Uemura, A.; Terauchi, R.; Takano, Y. Colletotrichum orbiculare Secretes Virulence Effectors to a Biotrophic Interface at the Primary Hyphal Neck via Exocytosis Coupled with SEC22-Mediated Traffic. Plant Cell 2014, 26, 2265–2281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  66. Irieda, H.; Takano, Y. Identification and Characterization of Virulence-Related Effectors in the Cucumber Anthracnose Fungus Colletotrichum orbiculare. Physiol. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2016, 95, 87–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Bhadauria, V.; MacLachlan, R.; Pozniak, C.; Banniza, S. Candidate Effectors Contribute to Race Differentiation and Virulence of the Lentil Anthracnose Pathogen Colletotrichum lentis. BMC Genom. 2015, 16, 628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Bhadauria, V.; Banniza, S.; Vandenberg, A.; Selvaraj, G.; Wei, Y. Overexpression of a Novel Biotrophy-Specific Colletotrichum truncatum Effector, CtNUDIX, in Hemibiotrophic Fungal Phytopathogens Causes Incompatibility with Their Host Plants. Eukar. Cell 2013, 12, 2–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. Bhadauria, V.; Vijayan, P.; Wei, Y.; Banniza, S. Transcriptome Analysis Reveals a Complex Interplay between Resistance and Effector Genes during the Compatible Lentil- Colletotrichum lentis Interaction. Sci. Reports 2017, 7, 42338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  70. Sanz-Martín, J.M.; Pacheco-Arjona, J.R.; Bello-Rico, V.; Vargas, W.A.; Monod, M.; Díaz-Mínguez, J.M.; Thon, M.R.; Sukno, S.A. A Highly Conserved Metalloprotease Effector Enhances Virulence in the Maize Anthracnose Fungus Colletotrichum graminicola. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2016, 17, 1048–1062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  71. Vargas, W.A.; Sanz-Martín, J.M.; Rech, G.E.; Armijos-Jaramillo, V.D.; Rivera, L.P.; Echeverria, M.M.; Díaz-Mínguez, J.M.; Thon, M.R.; Sukno, S.A. A Fungal Effector with Host Nuclear Localization and DNA-Binding Properties Is Required for Maize Anthracnose Development. MPMI 2015, 29, 83–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Eisermann, I.; Weihmann, F.; Krijger, J.-J.; Kröling, C.; Hause, G.; Menzel, M.; Pienkny, S.; Kiesow, A.; Deising, H.B.; Wirsel, S.G.R. Two Genes in a Pathogenicity Gene Cluster Encoding Secreted Proteins Are Required for Appressorial Penetration and Infection of the Maize Anthracnose Fungus Colletotrichum graminicola. Environ. Microbiol. 2019, 21, 4773–4791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  73. de Queiroz, C.B.; Correia, H.L.N.; Santana, M.F.; Batista, D.S.; Vidigal, P.M.P.; Brommonschenkel, S.H.; de Queiroz, M.V. The Repertoire of Effector Candidates in Colletotrichum lindemuthianum Reveals Important Information about Colletotrichum Genus Lifestyle. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2019, 103, 2295–2309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Prasanth, C.N.; Viswanathan, R.; Malathi, P.; Sundar, A.R. Comparative Transcriptome Analysis of Candidate Secretory Effector Proteins from Colletotrichum falcatum Infecting Sugarcane. Agri Gene 2019, 13, 100089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Zampounis, A.; Pigné, S.; Dallery, J.-F.; Wittenberg, A.H.J.; Zhou, S.; Schwartz, D.C.; Thon, M.R.; O’Connell, R.J. Genome Sequence and Annotation of Colletotrichum higginsianum, a Causal Agent of Crucifer Anthracnose Disease. Genome Announc. 2016, 4, e00821-16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  76. Katoh, K.; Standley, D.M. MAFFT Multiple Sequence Alignment Software Version 7: Improvements in Performance and Usability. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2013, 30, 772–780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  77. Kumar, S.; Stecher, G.; Tamura, K. MEGA7: Mol. Evolutionary Genetics Analysis Version 7.0 for Bigger Datasets. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2016, 33, 1870–1874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  78. Depotter, J.R.L.; Doehlemann, G. Target the Core: Durable Plant Resistance against Filamentous Plant Pathogens through Effector Recognition. Pest. Manag. Sci. 2020, 76, 426–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  79. Lu, S.; Edwards, M.C. Genome-Wide Analysis of Small Secreted Cysteine-Rich Proteins Identifies Candidate Effector Proteins Potentially Involved in Fusarium graminearum −wheat Interactions. Phytopathology 2016, 106, 166–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  80. Mesarich, C.H.; Bowen, J.K.; Hamiaux, C.; Templeton, M.D. Repeat-Containing Protein Effectors of Plant-Associated Organisms. Front. Plant Sci. 2015, 6, 872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  81. Sperschneider, J.; Catanzariti, A.-M.; DeBoer, K.; Petre, B.; Gardiner, D.M.; Singh, K.B.; Dodds, P.N.; Taylor, J.M. LOCALIZER: Subcellular Localization Prediction of Both Plant and Effector Proteins in the Plant Cell. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 44598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  82. Sperschneider, J.; Dodds, P.N.; Singh, K.B.; Taylor, J.M. ApoplastP: Prediction of Effectors and Plant Proteins in the Apoplast Using Machine Learning. New Phytol. 2018, 217, 1764–1778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  83. Hogenhout, S.A.; Van der Hoorn, R.A.L.; Terauchi, R.; Kamoun, S. Emerging Concepts in Effector Biology of Plant-Associated Organisms. MPMI 2009, 22, 115–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  84. Stergiopoulos, I.; van den Burg, H.A.; Okmen, B.; Beenen, H.G.; van Liere, S.; Kema, G.H.J.; de Wit, P.J.G.M. Tomato Cf Resistance Proteins Mediate Recognition of Cognate Homologous Effectors from Fungi Pathogenic on Dicots and Monocots. PNAS 2010, 107, 7610–7615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  85. Stergiopoulos, I.; Kourmpetis, Y.A.I.; Slot, J.C.; Bakker, F.T.; De Wit, P.J.G.M.; Rokas, A. In Silico Characterization and Molecular Evolutionary Analysis of a Novel Superfamily of Fungal Effector Proteins. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2012, 29, 3371–3384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  86. Prokchorchik, M.; Won, K.; Lee, Y.; Segonzac, C.; Sohn, K.H. Whole Genome Enabled Phylogenetic and Secretome Analyses of Two Venturia nashicola Isolates. Plant Pathol. J. 2020, 36, 98–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Fourie, A.; de Jonge, R.; van der Nest, M.A.; Duong, T.A.; Wingfield, M.J.; Wingfield, B.D.; Barnes, I. Genome Comparisons Suggest an Association between Ceratocystis Host Adaptations and Effector Clusters in Unique Transposable Element Families. Fungal Genet. Biol. 2020, 143, 103433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Dias, M.D.; Fonseca, M.E.N.; Dias-Neto, J.J.; Santos, M.D.M.; Pandolfo, G.M.; Boiteux, L.S.; Café-Filho, A.C. Biology, Pathogenicity, and Haplotype Analyses of Colletotrichum cliviae: A Novel Soybean Anthracnose Agent in Warm Tropical Areas. Trop. Plant Pathol. 2018, 43, 439–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Bhunjun, C.S.; Phukhamsakda, C.; Jayawardena, R.S.; Jeewon, R.; Promputtha, I.; Hyde, K.D. Investigating Species Boundaries in Colletotrichum. Fungal Divers. 2021, 107, 107–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Hymowitz, T. On the Domestication of the Soybean. Econ. Bot. 1970, 24, 408–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Sharma, S.K.; Gupta, G.K.; Ramteke, R. Colletotrichum truncatum [(Schw.) Andrus & W.D. Moore], the Causal Agent of Anthracnose of Soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merrill.]–a Review. Soybean Res. 2011, 9, 31–52. [Google Scholar]
  92. Fouché, S.; Plissonneau, C.; Croll, D. The Birth and Death of Effectors in Rapidly Evolving Filamentous Pathogen Genomes. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 2018, 46, 34–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Cai, L.; Hyde, K.D.; Taylor, P.W.J.; Weir, B.S.; Waller, J.M.; Abang, M.M.; Zhang, J.Z.; Yang, Y.H.; Phoulivong, S.; Liu, Z.Y.; et al. A Polyphasic Approach for Studying Colletotrichum. Fungal Divers. 2009, 39, 183–204. [Google Scholar]
  94. Jayawardena, R. Notes on Currently Accepted Species of Colletotrichum. Mycosphere 2016, 7, 1192–1260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Emms, D.M.; Kelly, S. OrthoFinder: Solving Fundamental Biases in Whole Genome Comparisons Dramatically Improves Orthogroup Inference Accuracy. Genome Biol. 2015, 16, 157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  96. Dubrulle, G.; Picot, A.; Madec, S.; Corre, E.; Pawtowski, A.; Baroncelli, R.; Zivy, M.; Balliau, T.; Le Floch, G.; Pensec, F. Deciphering the Infectious Process of Colletotrichum lupini in Lupin through Transcriptomic and Proteomic Analysis. Microorganisms 2020, 8, 1621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Conway, J.R.; Lex, A.; Gehlenborg, N. UpSetR: An R Package for the Visualization of Intersecting Sets and Their Properties. Bioinformatics 2017, 33, 2938–2940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  98. Almagro Armenteros, J.J.; Tsirigos, K.D.; Sønderby, C.K.; Petersen, T.N.; Winther, O.; Brunak, S.; von Heijne, G.; Nielsen, H. SignalP 5.0 Improves Signal Peptide Predictions Using Deep Neural Networks. Nat. Biotechnol. 2019, 37, 420–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Krogh, A.; Larsson, B.; von Heijne, G.; Sonnhammer, E.L.L. Predicting Transmembrane Protein Topology with a Hidden Markov Model: Application to Complete Genomes11Edited by F. Cohen. J. Mol. Biol. 2001, 305, 567–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  100. Pierleoni, A.; Martelli, P.; Casadio, R. PredGPI: A GPI-Anchor Predictor. BMC Bioinform. 2008, 9, 392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  101. Jorda, J.; Kajava, A.V. T-REKS: Identification of Tandem REpeats in Sequences with a K-MeanS Based Algorithm. Bioinformatics 2009, 25, 2632–2638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  102. Magoc, T.; Salzberg, S.L. FLASH: Fast Length Adjustment of Short Reads to Improve Genome Assemblies. Bioinformatics 2011, 27, 2957–2963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  103. Bankevich, A.; Nurk, S.; Dmitry, A.; Gurevich, A.A.; Dvorkin, M.; Kulikoc, A.S.; Lesin, V.M.; Nikolenki, S.I.; Pham, S.; Prjibelski, A.D.; et al. SPAdes: A New Genome Assembly Algorithm and Its Applications to Single-Cell Sequencing. J. Comput. Biol. 2012, 19, 455–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Pathogens 10 01520 g001 550
Figure 1. Evolutionary relationships of Colletotrichum species. (a) Bayesian inference phylogenetic of the strains used in this study. The tree was reconstructed from concatenated nucleotide alignments of the ACT (actin), CHS-1 (chitin synthase), and GAPDH (glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase) genes. For each locus the alignment was performed with MAFFT v7.450 [76], exported to MEGA7 [77] and the best-fit substitution model was calculated. Thicker branches represent nodes with Bayesian posterior probability equal to 1.00. The scale bar represents the number of expected substitutions per site. (b) Level of virulence of Colletotrichum species to soybean. Tukey’s test was applied on transformed data ((X + 1)ˆ0.5). Equal letters do not differ in the average of virulence among Colletotrichum strains in the Tukey test with p-value = 0.05%. Species belonging to the C. orchidearum species complex (s.c.) are represented by yellow bars, while C. truncatum is represented by the pink bar.
Figure 1. Evolutionary relationships of Colletotrichum species. (a) Bayesian inference phylogenetic of the strains used in this study. The tree was reconstructed from concatenated nucleotide alignments of the ACT (actin), CHS-1 (chitin synthase), and GAPDH (glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase) genes. For each locus the alignment was performed with MAFFT v7.450 [76], exported to MEGA7 [77] and the best-fit substitution model was calculated. Thicker branches represent nodes with Bayesian posterior probability equal to 1.00. The scale bar represents the number of expected substitutions per site. (b) Level of virulence of Colletotrichum species to soybean. Tukey’s test was applied on transformed data ((X + 1)ˆ0.5). Equal letters do not differ in the average of virulence among Colletotrichum strains in the Tukey test with p-value = 0.05%. Species belonging to the C. orchidearum species complex (s.c.) are represented by yellow bars, while C. truncatum is represented by the pink bar.
Pathogens 10 01520 g001
Pathogens 10 01520 g002 550
Figure 2. Comparative genomic analysis of Colletotrichum species pathogenic and not pathogenic to soybean. Species highlighted in yellow represent the C. orchidearum species complex (s.c.), and striped yellow bars correspond to each species belonging to the C. orchidearum s.c. (C. musicola, C. plurivorum and C. sojae); while C. truncatum is represented in red. (a) Heatmap showing the percentage of overlapping proteins shared in pairwise comparisons (values correspond to percentage of proteins encoded by the species reported in the y axis that show similarity with those reported by the species reported in the x axis). (b) UpsetR plot of the protein clustering analysis of 12 Colletotrichum species. Bars on the upper side represent the number of orthogroups shared by the species highlighted by the black dots reported on the bottom side. The number of genes corresponding to the orthogroups is in parentheses. (c) Species compared in this study, the bars on the right side of the species name represent the total number of orthogroups in each proteome. L1 (lineage 1); L2 (lineage 2).
Figure 2. Comparative genomic analysis of Colletotrichum species pathogenic and not pathogenic to soybean. Species highlighted in yellow represent the C. orchidearum species complex (s.c.), and striped yellow bars correspond to each species belonging to the C. orchidearum s.c. (C. musicola, C. plurivorum and C. sojae); while C. truncatum is represented in red. (a) Heatmap showing the percentage of overlapping proteins shared in pairwise comparisons (values correspond to percentage of proteins encoded by the species reported in the y axis that show similarity with those reported by the species reported in the x axis). (b) UpsetR plot of the protein clustering analysis of 12 Colletotrichum species. Bars on the upper side represent the number of orthogroups shared by the species highlighted by the black dots reported on the bottom side. The number of genes corresponding to the orthogroups is in parentheses. (c) Species compared in this study, the bars on the right side of the species name represent the total number of orthogroups in each proteome. L1 (lineage 1); L2 (lineage 2).
Pathogens 10 01520 g002
Pathogens 10 01520 g003 550
Figure 3. Effector candidates of Colletotrichum species pathogenic to soybean. Effector candidates of C. musicola, C. plurivorum, C. sojae and C. truncatum with similarity outside the genus Colletotrichum are represented in dark blue, while effector candidates with similarity with other species of the genus are represented in light brown. C. orchidearum-Lineage Specific Effector Candidates (LSECs) are represented in gray and species-LSECs are represented in light red. Total numbers of candidate effectors are represented in the bars.
Figure 3. Effector candidates of Colletotrichum species pathogenic to soybean. Effector candidates of C. musicola, C. plurivorum, C. sojae and C. truncatum with similarity outside the genus Colletotrichum are represented in dark blue, while effector candidates with similarity with other species of the genus are represented in light brown. C. orchidearum-Lineage Specific Effector Candidates (LSECs) are represented in gray and species-LSECs are represented in light red. Total numbers of candidate effectors are represented in the bars.
Pathogens 10 01520 g003
Pathogens 10 01520 g004 550
Figure 4. The distribution of 58 LSECs in 18 strains of Colletotrichum truncatum and evidence of expression of C. truncatum (CMES1059). 18 genomes of C. truncatum pathogenic to soybean were scanned for presence/absence of the 58 C. truncatum-LSECs using BLAST. Red squares indicate the presence of LSECs by the blasting with coverage >90% and identity >60%. Green squares indicate evidence of expression of LSECs in soybean and/or in vitro.
Figure 4. The distribution of 58 LSECs in 18 strains of Colletotrichum truncatum and evidence of expression of C. truncatum (CMES1059). 18 genomes of C. truncatum pathogenic to soybean were scanned for presence/absence of the 58 C. truncatum-LSECs using BLAST. Red squares indicate the presence of LSECs by the blasting with coverage >90% and identity >60%. Green squares indicate evidence of expression of LSECs in soybean and/or in vitro.
Pathogens 10 01520 g004
Table
Table 1. Colletotrichum strains used in the pathogenicity test and comparative genomics analysis.
Table 1. Colletotrichum strains used in the pathogenicity test and comparative genomics analysis.
StrainSpeciesSpecies ComplexHostOrigin*
MAFF 240422C. orbiculareC. orbiculareCucumis sativusJapan[47]
LFN0074C. musicolaC. orchidearumGlycine maxBrazil[54]
LFN0145C. plurivorumC. orchidearumGlycine maxBrazil[54]
LFN0009C. sojaeC. orchidearumGlycine maxBrazil[54]
CMES1059C. truncatumC. truncatumGlycine maxBrazil[54]
Cg-14C. gloeosporioides s.s.C. gloeosporioidesPersea americanaIsrael[34]
IMI 349063C. higginsianumC. destructivumBrassica rapaTrinidad & Tobago[75]
CBS 168.49C. tofieldiaeC. spaethianumLupinus polyphyllusGermany[41]
M1.001C. graminicolaC. graminicolaZea maysUSA[32]
IMI 309357C. orchidophilumnonePhalaenopsis sp.United Kingdom[45]
IMI 504882C. fioriniaeC. acutatumFragaria x ananassaNew Zealand[29]
IMI 504889C. nymphaeaeC. acutatumFragaria x ananassaDenmark[39]
* Reference of the genome sequences.
Table
Table 2. Secretome size of the four species of Colletotrichum that infect soybean, compared in this study.
Table 2. Secretome size of the four species of Colletotrichum that infect soybean, compared in this study.
SpeciesProteomeSignal PeptideAbsence of TM/GPI Anchor% of Secreted Proteins
C. truncatum15,9012116163810
C. plurivorum15,1531989149510
C. sojae16,124193114479
C. musicola16,826187114859
Table
Table 3. Predicted C. orchidearum s.c. and species-LSECs of the four species of Colletotrichum pathogenic to soybean, containing characteristics commonly associated with effector proteins in fungi, and the total number of protein sequences predicted as effectors by EffectorP 2.0.
Table 3. Predicted C. orchidearum s.c. and species-LSECs of the four species of Colletotrichum pathogenic to soybean, containing characteristics commonly associated with effector proteins in fungi, and the total number of protein sequences predicted as effectors by EffectorP 2.0.
C. orchidearum s.c. SECs
SpeciesLSECsRCPSL (NLS)SL (Other)ApoplastCREffectorP
C. musicola13500976
C. plurivorum11510765
C. sojae163221185
Species-LSECs
C. truncatum40752162116
C. musicola15202485
C. plurivorum8004142
C. sojae9201263
LSECs: Lineage Specific Effector Candidates; RCP: repeat-containing proteins; SL: subcellular localization; NLS: nuclear localization signal; CR: cysteine-rich proteins (>2%); NA: not applicable.
Table
Table 4. Colletotrichum truncatum strains used in the evolutionary analysis.
Table 4. Colletotrichum truncatum strains used in the evolutionary analysis.
StrainSpeciesSpecies ComplexHostOriginAccession N°
MT1-01C. truncatumC. truncatumGlycine maxBrazilSRX7095338
MT2-05C. truncatumC. truncatumGlycine maxBrazilSRX7095339
MT3-01C. truncatumC. truncatumGlycine maxBrazilSRX7095348
MT3-21C. truncatumC. truncatumGlycine maxBrazilSRX7095349
MT4-05C. truncatumC. truncatumGlycine maxBrazilSRX7095350
MT4-13C. truncatumC. truncatumGlycine maxBrazilSRX7095351
MT5-12C. truncatumC. truncatumGlycine maxBrazilSRX7095352
MT5-26C. truncatumC. truncatumGlycine maxBrazilSRX7095353
MT5-32C. truncatumC. truncatumGlycine maxBrazilSRX7095354
GO2-03C. truncatumC. truncatumGlycine maxBrazilSRX7095355
GO2-06C. truncatumC. truncatumGlycine maxBrazilSRX7095340
GO2-12C. truncatumC. truncatumGlycine maxBrazilSRX7095341
GO4-07C. truncatumC. truncatumGlycine maxBrazilSRX7095342
GO4-08C. truncatumC. truncatumGlycine maxBrazilSRX7095343
GO4-17C. truncatumC. truncatumGlycine maxBrazilSRX7095344
GO5-11C. truncatumC. truncatumGlycine maxBrazilSRX7095345
GO5-14C. truncatumC. truncatumGlycine maxBrazilSRX7095346
GO5-25C. truncatumC. truncatumGlycine maxBrazilSRX7095347
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Boufleur, T.R.; Massola Júnior, N.S.; Tikami, Í.; Sukno, S.A.; Thon, M.R.; Baroncelli, R. Identification and Comparison of Colletotrichum Secreted Effector Candidates Reveal Two Independent Lineages Pathogenic to Soybean. Pathogens 2021, 10, 1520. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens10111520

AMA Style

Boufleur TR, Massola Júnior NS, Tikami Í, Sukno SA, Thon MR, Baroncelli R. Identification and Comparison of Colletotrichum Secreted Effector Candidates Reveal Two Independent Lineages Pathogenic to Soybean. Pathogens. 2021; 10(11):1520. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens10111520

Chicago/Turabian Style

Boufleur, Thaís R., Nelson S. Massola Júnior, Ísis Tikami, Serenella A. Sukno, Michael R. Thon, and Riccardo Baroncelli. 2021. "Identification and Comparison of Colletotrichum Secreted Effector Candidates Reveal Two Independent Lineages Pathogenic to Soybean" Pathogens 10, no. 11: 1520. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens10111520

APA Style

Boufleur, T. R., Massola Júnior, N. S., Tikami, Í., Sukno, S. A., Thon, M. R., & Baroncelli, R. (2021). Identification and Comparison of Colletotrichum Secreted Effector Candidates Reveal Two Independent Lineages Pathogenic to Soybean. Pathogens, 10(11), 1520. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens10111520

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop