Maize OPR2 and LOX10 Mediate Defense against Fall Armyworm and Western Corn Rootworm by Tissue-Specific Regulation of Jasmonic Acid and Ketol Metabolism

Foliage-feeding fall armyworm (FAW; Spodoptera frugiperda) and root-feeding western corn rootworm (WCR; Diabrotica virgifera virgifera) are maize (Zea mays L.) pests that cause significant yield losses. Jasmonic acid (JA) plays a pivotal defense role against insects. 12-oxo-phytodienoic acid (12-OPDA) is converted into JA by peroxisome-localized OPDA reductases (OPR). However, little is known about the physiological functions of cytoplasmic OPRs. Here, we show that disruption of ZmOPR2 reduced wound-induced JA production and defense against FAW while accumulating more JA catabolites. Overexpression of ZmOPR2 in Arabidopsis enhanced JA production and defense against beet armyworm (BAW; Spodoptera exigua). In addition, lox10opr2 double mutants were more susceptible than either single mutant, suggesting that ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 uniquely and additively contributed to defense. In contrast to the defensive roles of ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 in leaves, single mutants did not display any alteration in root herbivory defense against WCR. Feeding on lox10opr2 double mutants resulted in increased WCR mortality associated with greater herbivory-induced production of insecticidal death acids and ketols. Thus, ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 cooperatively inhibit the synthesis of these metabolites during herbivory by WCR. We conclude that ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 regulate JA-mediated resistance in leaves against FAW while suppressing insecticidal oxylipin synthesis in roots during WCR infestation.


Introduction
Maize (Zea mays L.) is a major cereal crop produced globally and a staple crop in many parts of the world.Maize is also a major feed source for livestock worldwide and is used to produce a variety of foods and industrial products.In 2021, U.S. maize production was worth close to USD 86 billion [1].Maize production is constantly threatened by abiotic and biotic stressors, including the attack of insect herbivores [2].Fall armyworm (FAW, Spodoptera frugiperda) and western corn rootworm (WCR, Diabrotica virgifera virgifera) are among the world's most important maize pests [3][4][5][6][7].
FAW causes devastating yield losses annually in maize [8].Its larvae feed on foliage, stems, and reproductive tissues, and maize is its preferred host.Aside from maize, it has been reported to attack >350 plant species, including numerous crops such as maize, sorghum, soybean, cotton, barley, and wheat [9,10].FAW is native to the American tropics and subtropics and has recently invaded Africa, Asia, and Australia [8,10].The rapid global spread of FAW has caused significant yield losses and threatened food security, especially in African countries where maize is a staple and the most susceptible crop.Annual yield losses caused by FAW are estimated to exceed USD 9 billion [11,12].Resistance to FAW and other chewing insects is mediated mainly by jasmonic acid (JA)-mediated signaling [13][14][15].
WCR is a specialist herbivore of maize and the most important maize pest in the USA [16,17].WCR larvae cause significant injury to maize roots and are difficult to control with insecticides because of their belowground feeding habits.WCR is proposed to have originated in Mexico or Guatemala and spread into North America with the spread of maize cultivation [18].WCR was first identified as a pest in the USA in the early 1900s and quickly expanded its range throughout North America, where it has caused significant economic losses for over a century, especially in the USA corn belt [16,18].WCR was detected in Europe in 1992 and has now invaded 21 European countries [19].WCR is known as the billion-dollar beetle, because annual costs associated with its control and lost yield exceed USD 1 billion [20].Maize resistance mechanisms against WCR are not well understood, and whether JA signaling plays any role in defense responses is unclear [21].
Plant OPRs are phylogenetically and functionally classified into OPRI and OPRII subfamilies depending on their substrate catalytic activity [36,37].OPRII subfamily peroxisomelocalized enzymes are JA-producing OPRs because they preferentially catalyze the conversion of the natural JA precursor, cis-(+)-OPDA.The members of the cytosolic OPRI subfamily were found to reduce cis-(-)-OPDA and were long believed to be irrelevant in JA biosynthesis [38,39].So far, several OPRII genes have been characterized.Arabidopsis intronic T-DNA insertional opr3 mutants are deficient in wound-induced JA production and more susceptible to cabbage looper caterpillars [40].Disruption of both maize ZmOPR7 and ZmOPR8 results in JA deficiency and extreme susceptibility to the root-rotting oomycete Pythium spp.and beet armyworm (BAW, Spodoptera exigua) [13].Little is known about the biochemical and physiological functions of OPRI subfamily enzymes, and it is unknown whether they contribute to insect defense.
Previously, the OPRI subfamily member ZmOPR2 was shown to be localized to the cytoplasm [41] and functions in salicylic acid (SA)-mediated defense responses against maize biotrophic and hemibiotrophic pathogens via suppression of JA production in response to pathogen infection [42].However, its role in wound-induced JA production and insect defense remains unexplored.This study aimed to partly fill this gap and explore the role, if any, of ZmOPR2 in insect defense in both above-and belowground tissues.We show here that ZmOPR2 contributes to aboveground defense against FAW by regulating wound-induced JA production and catabolism and interacting additively with ZmLOX10 in resistance to herbivory in leaves.Additionally, we show that while single opr2 or lox10 mutants did not affect maize defense against WCR, lox10opr2 double mutants markedly reduced the survival of WCR larvae.Metabolite profiling of the lox10opr2 double mutants under WCR herbivory revealed increased accumulations of multiple ketols and death acids known to have insecticidal activities when delivered via an artificial diet.Given these findings, we concluded that ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 together negatively regulate the production of insecticidal death acids and ketols, which are likely a part of the host defense strategy against herbivory by WCR.Additionally, our data suggested that JA may not have as significant a function in herbivory defense in maize roots as it has in the leaves.

Plant Materials
Mutator-insertional opr2-1 (PV 03 80 A-05) and opr2-3 (mu1079063:Mu; stock ID UFMu-08953) alleles were backcrossed to the B73 inbred line and advanced to BC 7 and BC 1 stages, respectively.Mutants and their corresponding near-isogenic wild-types were identified from F2 segregating populations by PCR genotyping using Mu-terminal inverted repeatspecific and gene-specific primers as described previously [42].opr2-1 and opr2-3 are knockout alleles and were described in detail in Huang et al. [42].The identification of the lox10-3 allele was previously described by Christensen et al. [14].The double mutant lox10opr2 was generated by crossing the single mutants lox10-3 and opr2-1 at the BC 7 genetic stage [42].Maize seeds were grown in conical pots (20.5 by 4 cm) filled with commercial potting mix (Jolly Gardener Pro Line C/20 potting mix) on light shelves at room temperature (22 to 24 • C) with a 16 h light period.For generating Arabidopsis ZmOPR2overexpression lines, gateway vectors carrying the ZmOPR2 gene were transformed into the rdr6-11 background as described in Tolley et al. [41] and grown under the same conditions.Two T4 homozygous ZmOPR2-GFP overexpression lines, #32-9 and #39-1, were named in this study OE1 and OE2 lines, respectively, and untransformed rdr6-11 plants were used as the WT controls.

Fall Armyworm Bioassays
The laboratory strain of FAW (Spodoptera frugiperda) was purchased from Benzon Research (Carlisle, PA, USA).The eggs laid on paper towels were hatched and reared on an artificial diet purchased from Southland Products Inc. (Southland Products Inc, Lake Village, AR, USA).To evaluate insect resistance and leaf damage area, the fourth leaf of maize plants at the V4 stage were individually caged and infested with one 3rd instar FAW larva per spot for approximately one hour, then moved toward the base afterward, and so on.Leaves were scanned, and eaten areas were measured with ImageJ software (https://imagej.nih.gov/ij/index.html,accessed on 8 August 2023).Larval weight gain experiments were performed by caging six FAW neonates with individual maize plants at the V3 developmental stage and allowing them to move and feed on the plant freely for 7 days.FAW larvae were removed from the plants, and total weight was determined 7 days post-infestation.

Beet Armyworm Bioassay
BAW (Spodoptera exigua) eggs were purchased from Benzon Research (Carlisle, PA, USA).After hatching, neonate larvae were reared on an artificial diet purchased from Southland Product Inc. (Lake Village, AR, USA) for 5 days.Third instar larvae were starved overnight, and the initial weight was measured before transferring to a 0.8% agar plate.Mature rosette leaves were cut from 4-week-old Arabidopsis plants and placed on the plate with 4 BAW larvae per plate.Fresh leaves were provided two days after the initial feeding, and the experiment was terminated on day 4.The larval weight gain was determined after subtracting the initial weight and normalizing it by the number of recovered larvae.

WCR Bioassays
WCR (Diabrotica virgifera virgifera) eggs were provided by the USDA-ARS North Central Agriculture Research Laboratory (Brookings, SD, USA) and stored at 4 • C until use.The diapausing Tent strain was used for this study.Prior to use, eggs were washed and incubated on moist filter paper for 12 days at 27 • C. Neonates were used within 24 h after the first emergence.For the WCR assay, maize seeds were grown in conical pots (20.5 by 4 cm) filled with commercial potting mix (Jolly Gardener Pro Line C/25 potting mix) in a climate-controlled, insect-free growth room under artificial full-spectrum growing lights (27 • C, 50% relative humidity, 12:12 h light:dark cycle, PPFD 450 µmol m −2 s −1 ).Experiments were performed in the same environmental conditions in which plants were grown.Plants were watered as needed before the application of WCR neonates.Two to three week old maize plants that had 3 fully expanded true leaves were infested with 10 WCR neonates.WCR larvae were removed from the soil, and total weight gain was determined 10 days post-infestation.The recovery of WCR larvae is a proxy measure of survivorship.WCR head capsules were then imaged and measured using ImageJ to quantify larval instar stage (ImageJ, National Institute of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA).The soil was then removed from the root tissue, and the fresh root weight was measured.Root ratio was analyzed as larvae damaged over undamaged root mass to determine host plant tolerance as compared to WT.

Oxylipin Profiling of Wounded Leaf Tissue and WCR-Infested Root Tissues
For wounding treatment in leaves, the third fully expanded leaves of seedlings at the V3 developmental stage were wounded seven times using a hemostat, with three wound sites on one side and four on the other side of the midvein and wound sites approximately 1 cm apart in the middle portion of the leaf.For Arabidopsis, rosette leaves were wounded twice using forceps across the midvein.The wounded regions were then harvested in 2 mL screwcap Fast-Prep tubes (Qbiogene, Carlsbad, CA, USA) in liquid nitrogen and stored in an −80 • C freezer.For WCR-infested root tissues, maize root tissues were washed at 0 (CTRL), 8, 24, and 48 h after being exposed to WCR neonates, harvested in liquid nitrogen, and stored in an −80 • C freezer.Phytohormone and oxylipin extraction and profiling of wounded leaf tissue were performed using a LC-MS/MS as described in Huang et al. [42].

Statistical Methods
Statistical analyses were performed using the software programs R (R version 4.2.2,R Core Team, 2023, Vienna, Austria), JMP Pro 17 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA), and GraphPad Prism 10 (GraphPad Software, Boston, MA, USA).FAW leaf area consumed and larval weight gain were analyzed using the Student's t-test.BAW larval weight gain was analyzed using ANOVA followed by Dunnett's test.Two-way ANOVAs, with genotype and time as the two factors, were used for leaf metabolite analysis of WT-mutant comparisons followed by Sidak's multiple comparisons test for comparisons within time.FAW larval weight gain and leaf area consumed were compared using ANOVA followed by Tukey's honestly significant differences (HSD) test.Root and shoot ratios, WCR larvae recovery, and WCR mass gain were analyzed using ANOVA followed by Tukey's multiple comparison test.Larval instars were compared using ANOVA, followed by Dunnett's multiple comparison test.Root hormone analyses at 24 hpi were compared using the Student's t-test.

ZmOPR2 Promotes Defense against FAW Herbivory
In a previous study, we reported that ZmOPR2 functions in SA-mediated defense responses against (hemi)biotrophic pathogens by suppressing the activity of JA-producing ZmLOX10 [42].In this study, we tested whether ZmOPR2 is relevant to insect defense by caging single 3rd instar FAW larvae on the leaves of opr2-1 and opr2-3 mutants and their respective WTs at the V4 developmental stage in maize.After 6 h, FAW larvae consumed significantly more leaf tissue in opr2-1 and opr2-3 mutant seedlings (~1.5-and 3.5-fold larger, respectively) compared to consumption in WT seedlings, suggesting that opr2 mutants are more susceptible to FAW (Figure 1A).Consistent with this result, FAW larvae weighed significantly more (>40%) after feeding on opr2-1 and opr2-3 mutants for 7 days than those fed on WT plants (Figure 1B).These results suggested that ZmOPR2 is involved in defense against aboveground herbivory by chewing insects.Transgenic Arabidopsis plants overexpressing ZmOPR2 were generated to corroborate whether ZmOPR2 enhances insect defense [41].Third instar BAW larvae were offered mature rosette leaves from ZmOPR2-OE Arabidopsis lines or control plants for 4 days.After 4 days, BAW larvae gained significantly less weight (29-39% reduction) after feeding on ZmOPR2-OE line leaves compared to larvae feeding on WT leaves, suggesting that overexpression of ZmOPR2 in Arabidopsis enhanced defense against BAW (Figure 1C).Together, these results showed that ZmOPR2 promotes defense in aboveground tissues against chewing insects such as FAW and BAW.

ZmOPR2 Enhances Wound-Induced JA Accumulation
A previous study showed that disruption of ZmOPR2 in maize resulted in reduced resistance to hemibiotrophic Colletotrichum graminicola and was associated with greater infection-induced JA accumulation [42].Surprisingly, in the present study, we found that opr2 mutants were more susceptible to FAW, which prompted us to test whether ZmOPR2 plays a role in wound-induced JA production.To this end, leaves of opr2-1 and opr2-3 mutants and WT were mechanically wounded, and the accumulation of jasmonates was measured at 0, 1, and 2 h post-wounding (hpw).We found that opr2-1 and opr2-3 mutants accumulated significantly lower levels of wound-induced JA at 1 and 2 hpw (16 and 27% reduction in opr2-1, 31 and 34% reduction in opr2-3, respectively) (Figure 2B) and JA-Ile (25 and 41% reduction in opr2-1, 42 and 55% reduction in opr2-3) (Figure 2C).Both alleles accumulated similar amounts of 12-ODPA compared to WT (Figure 2A).

ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 Have an Additive Effect on Defense against FAW
Previous reports showed that ZmLOX10 plays an important role in plant modulation of insect defense by taking part in the biosynthesis of green leaf volatiles (GLV) and JA in response to wounding and insect herbivory [14,43].Although mutation of ZmOPR2 increased the production of ZmLOX10-mediated GLVs and accumulation of JA in response to pathogen infection [42], similar to lox10 mutants, opr2 mutants in the present study accumulated less wound-induced JA and JA-Ile and were more susceptible to a chewing insect, FAW.To explore the relative contributions of ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 to defense against herbivory, we performed FAW bioassays on single opr2-1 and lox10-3 mutants, lox10opr2 double mutants, and corresponding WT controls.We found that while the 3rd instar FAW larvae consumed 64% and 60% more leaf tissue in single opr2-1 and lox10-3 mutants, respectively, compared to WT, FAW larvae consumed twice as much (126%) lox10opr2 double mutant tissue (Figure 5A).Correspondingly, FAW larvae gained more weight after feeding on single opr2-1 and lox10-3 mutants (48% increase) compared to those fed on WT, and FAW larvae that fed on lox10opr2 double mutants showed the greatest increase in weight (167%) relative to WT (Figure 5B).Together, these results suggested that ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 acted additively in defense modulation against the chewing insect FAW and that the contribution of ZmOPR2 to defense against chewing insects extends beyond its role in JA synthesis.

ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 Have an Additive Effect on Defense against FAW
Previous reports showed that ZmLOX10 plays an important role in plant modulation of insect defense by taking part in the biosynthesis of green leaf volatiles (GLV) and JA in response to wounding and insect herbivory [14,43].Although mutation of ZmOPR2 increased the production of ZmLOX10-mediated GLVs and accumulation of JA in response to pathogen infection [42], similar to lox10 mutants, opr2 mutants in the present study accumulated less wound-induced JA and JA-Ile and were more susceptible to a chewing insect, FAW.To explore the relative contributions of ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 to defense against herbivory, we performed FAW bioassays on single opr2-1 and lox10-3 mutants, lox10opr2 double mutants, and corresponding WT controls.We found that while the 3rd instar FAW larvae consumed 64% and 60% more leaf tissue in single opr2-1 and lox10-3 mutants, respectively, compared to WT, FAW larvae consumed twice as much (126%) lox10opr2 double mutant tissue (Figure 5A).Correspondingly, FAW larvae gained more weight after feeding on single opr2-1 and lox10-3 mutants (48% increase) compared to those fed on WT, and FAW larvae that fed on lox10opr2 double mutants showed the greatest increase in weight (167%) relative to WT (Figure 5B).Together, these results suggested that ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 acted additively in defense modulation against the chewing insect FAW and that the contribution of ZmOPR2 to defense against chewing insects extends beyond its role in JA synthesis.

ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 Negatively Regulate Production of Insecticidal Oxylipins during Root Herbivory by WCR
Multiple lines of evidence, including the current study, confirm that JA plays an essential role in regulating plant defense responses against chewing insects in aboveground tissues [13,44].However, whether JA is required for WCR defense in roots remains largely unknown.Here, we tested whether ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 contribute to JA synthesis and defense against chewing insects in roots by assaying corresponding single and double mutants.We found that the survivorship of WCR larvae feeding on the roots of lox10opr2 mutants was lower in comparison to the survivorship of larvae feeding on the roots of single opr2-1 or WT plants (ANOVA, F3, 119 = 6.11, p < 0.001) (Figure 6A), but showed no difference in comparison to a single lox10-3 mutant.However, no significant difference in larval weights was found after larvae fed on opr2-1, lox10-3, or lox10opr2 mutants compared to larvae fed on WT (ANOVA, F3,95 = 0.427, p = 0.733) (Figure 6B).Additionally, WCR larvae feeding on lox10-3 or lox10opr2 mutants developed slower compared to those feeding on opr2-1 mutant and WT plants (ANOVA, F3, 45 = 4.428, p = 0.008) (Figure 6C).Finally, lox10opr2 mutants showed greater tolerance (ability to recover tissues lost to herbivory) compared to WT, opr2-1, and lox10-3 mutants (ANOVA, F3, 119 = 3.907, p = 0.011), as indicated by their greater root mass ratio (ratio of root mass of plants exposed to WCR relative to root mass of plants not exposed to WCR) (Figure 6D).Together, these results showed that ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 downregulated both direct defense and tolerance against the chewing insect WCR in maize roots.

ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 Negatively Regulate Production of Insecticidal Oxylipins during Root Herbivory by WCR
Multiple lines of evidence, including the current study, confirm that JA plays an essential role in regulating plant defense responses against chewing insects in aboveground tissues [13,44].However, whether JA is required for WCR defense in roots remains largely unknown.Here, we tested whether ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 contribute to JA synthesis and defense against chewing insects in roots by assaying corresponding single and double mutants.We found that the survivorship of WCR larvae feeding on the roots of lox10opr2 mutants was lower in comparison to the survivorship of larvae feeding on the roots of single opr2-1 or WT plants (ANOVA, F3, 119 = 6.11, p < 0.001) (Figure 6A), but showed no difference in comparison to a single lox10-3 mutant.However, no significant difference in larval weights was found after larvae fed on opr2-1, lox10-3, or lox10opr2 mutants compared to larvae fed on WT (ANOVA, F3,95 = 0.427, p = 0.733) (Figure 6B).Additionally, WCR larvae feeding on lox10-3 or lox10opr2 mutants developed slower compared to those feeding on opr2-1 mutant and WT plants (ANOVA, F3, 45 = 4.428, p = 0.008) (Figure 6C).Finally, lox10opr2 mutants showed greater tolerance (ability to recover tissues lost to herbivory) compared to WT, opr2-1, and lox10-3 mutants (ANOVA, F3, 119 = 3.907, p = 0.011), as indicated by their greater root mass ratio (ratio of root mass of plants exposed to WCR relative to root mass of plants not exposed to WCR) (Figure 6D).Together, these results showed that ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 downregulated both direct defense and tolerance against the chewing insect WCR in maize roots.To investigate metabolites responsible for the enhanced defense and greater tolerance of lox10opr2, we quantified root metabolites of WT and lox10opr2 double mutant plants at 0 (no WCR herbivory), 8, 24, and 48 h post-exposure to WCR larvae.The relative abundances of root metabolites in WT and lox10opr2 double mutant plants were visualized in a two-way dendrogram and heatmap to reveal the temporal dynamics and variation of metabolite accumulation (Supplemental Figure S1).Examination of the heatmap suggested that, in aggregate, metabolite levels in WT decreased between 0 and 8 h and remained at low levels through 48 h after exposure to WCR larvae, while aggregate metabolite levels in lox10opr2 double mutants were low between 0 and 8 h, increased at 24 h, and decreased at 48 h (Supplemental Figure S1).Interestingly, accumulation of JA and JA-Ile did not differ between WT and lox10opr2 double mutants at any of the time points (0-48 h), suggesting that, while phenotypic changes were evident in the double mutants, these changes were not due to changes in JA-related abundances (Supplemental Figures S1 and S2).After paired comparisons between WT-lox10opr2 mutants for all metabolites at 24 h post exposure to WCR, we identified several compounds that accumulated at significantly higher levels in lox10opr2 mutant plants than WT at 24 h post WCR infestation (Figure 7A).These included four oxylipins synthesized by the 9-LOX pathways: 10-OPDA (Student's t-test, T = 2.583, p = 0.036), 10-OPEA (Student's t-test, T = 2.899, p = 0.023), 13,10-KODA (Student's t-test, T = 3.667, p = 0.014), and 13,10-KOMA (Student's t-test, T = 2.793, p = 0.038) and two oxylipins synthesized in the 13-LOX pathways: 13,12-KODA (Student's t-test, T = 2.546, p = 0.034) and 12,13-EpOD (Student's t-test, T = 2.497, p = 0.037) (Figure 7B); and ABA (Student's t-test, T = -3.0192,p = 0.016) (Supplemental Figure S2) relative to To investigate metabolites responsible for the enhanced defense and greater tolerance of lox10opr2, we quantified root metabolites of WT and lox10opr2 double mutant plants at 0 (no WCR herbivory), 8, 24, and 48 h post-exposure to WCR larvae.The relative abundances of root metabolites in WT and lox10opr2 double mutant plants were visualized in a two-way dendrogram and heatmap to reveal the temporal dynamics and variation of metabolite accumulation (Supplemental Figure S1).Examination of the heatmap suggested that, in aggregate, metabolite levels in WT decreased between 0 and 8 h and remained at low levels through 48 h after exposure to WCR larvae, while aggregate metabolite levels in lox10opr2 double mutants were low between 0 and 8 h, increased at 24 h, and decreased at 48 h (Supplemental Figure S1).Interestingly, accumulation of JA and JA-Ile did not differ between WT and lox10opr2 double mutants at any of the time points (0-48 h), suggesting that, while phenotypic changes were evident in the double mutants, these changes were not due to changes in JA-related abundances (Supplemental Figures S1 and  S2).After paired comparisons between WT-lox10opr2 mutants for all metabolites at 24 h post exposure to WCR, we identified several compounds that accumulated at significantly higher levels in lox10opr2 mutant plants than WT at 24 h post WCR infestation (Figure 7A).These included four oxylipins synthesized by the 9-LOX pathways: 10-OPDA (Student's t-test, T = 2.583, p = 0.036), 10-OPEA (Student's t-test, T = 2.899, p = 0.023), 13,10-KODA (Student's t-test, T = 3.667, p = 0.014), and 13,10-KOMA (Student's t-test, T = 2.793, p = 0.038) and two oxylipins synthesized in the 13-LOX pathways: 13,12-KODA (Student's t-test, T = 2.546, p = 0.034) and 12,13-EpOD (Student's t-test, T = 2.497, p = 0.037) (Figure 7B); and ABA (Student's t-test, T = −3.0192,p = 0.016) (Supplemental Figure S2) relative to their WT controls before returning to WT levels at 48 h post-infestation.It is likely that these insecticidal and signaling oxylipins [31,45] underlie the increased mortality of larvae feeding on lox10opr2 roots and enhanced tolerance of lox10opr2 double mutants.
their WT controls before returning to WT levels at 48 h post-infestation.It is likely that these insecticidal and signaling oxylipins [31,45] underlie the increased mortality of larvae feeding on lox10opr2 roots and enhanced tolerance of lox10opr2 double mutants.

Discussion
JA has been extensively studied in aboveground tissue for its role in herbivory defense against chewing insects in numerous plant species, including maize [13,14,46,47].For instance, suppression of JA-producing OPRII enzymes resulted in reduced resistance to insect herbivory in aboveground Arabidopsis and maize tissues [13,40].In contrast, there are no studies reporting the roles of any OPRI subfamily member in insect defense.The maize genome contains eight OPR genes, six of which belong to the OPRI subfamily [37].Green leaf volatiles, mechanical wounding, and insect elicitor treatment have been shown to induce expression of ZmOPR1/2 [37,48], and feeding by either BAW or FAW induced ZmOPR2 expression in maize [15,49], suggesting that ZmOPR2 may be involved in insect defense.Elevated pathogen-induced JA contents in opr2 mutants [42] led us to test whether opr2 mutants also produce higher wound-induced jasmonates and are more resistant to FAW.However, the results showed that opr2 mutants unexpectedly accumulated

Discussion
JA has been extensively studied in aboveground tissue for its role in herbivory defense against chewing insects in numerous plant species, including maize [13,14,46,47].For instance, suppression of JA-producing OPRII enzymes resulted in reduced resistance to insect herbivory in aboveground Arabidopsis and maize tissues [13,40].In contrast, there are no studies reporting the roles of any OPRI subfamily member in insect defense.The maize genome contains eight OPR genes, six of which belong to the OPRI subfamily [37].Green leaf volatiles, mechanical wounding, and insect elicitor treatment have been shown to induce expression of ZmOPR1/2 [37,48], and feeding by either BAW or FAW induced ZmOPR2 expression in maize [15,49], suggesting that ZmOPR2 may be involved in insect defense.Elevated pathogen-induced JA contents in opr2 mutants [42] led us to test whether opr2 mutants also produce higher wound-induced jasmonates and are more resistant to FAW.However, the results showed that opr2 mutants unexpectedly accumulated lower levels of wound-induced JA and JA-Ile (Figure 2B,C), which was associated with increased susceptibility to FAW as manifested by greater consumption of leaf tissue by FAW and greater weight gain in FAW larvae after feeding on opr2 mutants compared to those feeding on WT.Correspondingly, overexpression of ZmOPR2 in Arabidopsis enhanced the production of wound-induced JA and JA-Ile (Figure 3C,D) and resistance to BAW.ZmOPR2 belongs to the OPRI subfamily that preferentially catalyzes the reduction of cis-(-) OPDA over the JA precursor cis-(+) OPDA [36] and localizes in the cytoplasm [41].Therefore, ZmOPR2 was believed to not be directly involved in providing substrate for JA biosynthesis.In maize, only ZmOPR7 and ZmOPR8 belong to the OPRII subfamily, which preferentially catalyzes cis-(+) OPDA over cis-(-) OPDA to form the JA precursor OPC 8:0, and disruption of these two genes results in JA-deficiency and increased susceptibility to chewing insects and necrotrophic pathogens [13,50].However, there are trace amounts of JA accumulation in the young leaves of mature opr7opr8 plants [13], suggesting the occurrence of at least another OPR enzyme capable of producing JA under specific conditions.In Arabidopsis, the OPRII enzyme AtOPR3 was considered the only JA-producing OPR enzyme [51,52].AtOPR2, an OPRI subfamily member, was ruled out of playing a direct role in JA biosynthesis because it is not localized to the peroxisome and because of its low efficiency in catalyzing reduction on cis-(+) OPDA.Recently, a novel AtOPR3-independent pathway for JA biosynthesis was discovered that involves cytosolic AtOPR2 and uses 4,5-didehydrojasmonate as a JA substrate derived from dn-12-OPDA rather than cis-(+) OPDA [53].In addition, increased dosage or transgenic overexpression of OPRI subfamily genes reduced seminal root growth in wheat and was associated with a higher accumulation of JA [54].In agreement with these findings, we observed that ZmOPR2-OE lines accumulated reduced levels of woundinduced dn-12-OPDA, presumably due to its utilization as the primary substrate for JA synthesis (Figure 3B).Thus, it is likely that ZmOPR2 is also involved in wound-induced JA production in the pathway identified for Arabidopsis AtOPR2.In maize, the existence of a similarly alternative JA synthesis pathway is supported by our previous finding that normally JA-deficient opr7opr8 mutants accumulated significant levels of JA in response to C. graminicola at 7 days post-infection [55].
Other than directly producing JA, the decreased wound-induced JA found in opr2 mutants may be due to increased catabolism of JA based on our finding that opr2 mutants accumulated significantly higher levels of JA catabolites, such as 12-OH-JA, 12-OH-JA-Ile, and 12-COOH-JA-Ile (Figure 4A-C).In contrast, after C. graminicola infection, susceptible opr2 mutants showed greater levels of JA and JA-Ile [42], accompanied by significantly lower pathogen-induced accumulation of 12-OH-JA (Supplemental Figure S3), while 12-OH-JA-Ile and 12-COOH-JA-Ile were undetectable.Together, these data suggest that ZmOPR2 may not only contribute to JA biosynthesis directly but also regulate JA catabolism under various stress conditions by a yet unknown mechanism.
Our results provided evidence that, in addition to its important role in JA synthesis and catabolism, ZmOPR2 appears to contribute to defense by an additional yet not understood mechanism.This conclusion is based on our finding that lox10opr2 double mutants are more susceptible than single lox10 or opr2 mutants (Figure 5).This result suggests that ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 interact positively to regulate defense against chewing insects, and the increased susceptibility of the double mutant cannot be explained by lower JA or GLV production alone, as reported for lox10-3 single mutants [14].Based on the well-reported biochemical activities of the OPRI subfamily, ZmOPR2 may also contribute to defense by detoxifying multiple α, β-unsaturated carbonyls [56].
Plants are likely to orchestrate divergent defense responses to aboveground and belowground insect herbivory.Contrasting results have been shown in defense against FAW and WCR in Mp708, a FAW-resistant inbred line that was found to be susceptible to WCR [57,58].While JA and related metabolites play essential roles in the mediation of defense responses against herbivory in aboveground tissues, several studies reported a much lower degree of herbivory-or wounding-induced accumulation of JA and JA-related metabolites and lower expression of JA-dependent genes in infested roots [59][60][61].ZmOPR1 and ZmOPR2 are both significantly induced after WCR infestation, while expression of JA-producing ZmOPR7 and ZmOPR8 is not affected or minimally so per RNAseq transcriptome analyses of maize-WCR interactions [59,61].Additionally, in the present study, we showed that JA accumulation upon WCR infestation was not significantly changed through 48 h post-infestation, suggesting that ZmOPR1 and ZmOPR2 may contribute to resistance to WCR via a JA-independent pathway and that JA may have little relevance to WCR defense.Given the clear evidence presented here that both ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 are required for defense against leaf herbivory by FAW, it was surprising to find that neither lox10-3 nor opr2-1 single mutants were affected in their resistance to WCR, but lox10opr2 double mutants were more tolerant to herbivory, as evidenced by less tissue consumed by WCR larvae.Notably, feeding on lox10opr2 double mutant roots resulted in greater mortality of WCR larvae.In the metabolite analysis of roots in response to WCR infestation, we found that the more tolerant lox10opr2 mutants accumulated higher levels of several oxylipins at 24 h post-WCR infestation, including death acids, 10-OPDA and 10-OPEA, and several ketols, 13,10-KODA, 13,10-KOMA, and 13,12-KODA (Figure 7).A greater accumulation of these metabolites may underlie the greater mortality of WCR larvae that we found.10-OPDA and 10-OPEA possess insecticidal activity and strongly suppress larval growth [45].For instance, fatty acid-derived ketols were shown to contain hormone-like signaling activities to induce systemic resistance against pathogens and insects [30,31,34,35].Moreover, Yuan et al. [31] showed that in addition to strong signaling activity, the ketol 9,10-KODA displayed insecticidal activity against FAW.Whether the ketols 13,10-KODA, 13,10-KOMA, and 13,12-KODA that accumulated to greater levels in lox10opr2 mutants also possess insecticidal activities or suppress larval growth requires further study.Nevertheless, these data suggest that ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 negatively regulate WCR resistance by suppressing the biosynthesis of lipid-derived insecticidal death acids and ketols.

Conclusions
In this study, we showed that disruption of ZmOPR2 resulted in reduced accumulation of wound-induced JA, elevated levels of JA derivatives, and increased susceptibility to leaf herbivory by FAW.Overexpression of ZmOPR2 in Arabidopsis enhanced wound-induced JA production, suppressed JA catabolism, and increased resistance to BAW.Together, these data demonstrated that ZmOPR2, a member of the OPRI subfamily enzymes, modulates defense against leaf herbivores by regulating JA homeostasis.Moreover, we found that ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 synergistically contribute to insect defense in the aboveground tissue.In contrast, ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 cooperatively suppress resistance to WCR by inhibiting the synthesis of death acids and ketols in roots upon WCR infestation.The results suggest that these metabolites may play a major role in the defense against root herbivory.

Genes 2023 , 17 Figure 1 .Figure 1 .
Figure 1.ZmOPR2 promotes insect resistance.(A) The fourth leaf of opr2-1 and its WT at V4 stage were caged and infested with one 3rd instar FAW larva per leaf.The leaves were scanned after the experiment, and eaten leaf areas were measured using ImageJ.(B) opr2-1 and opr2-3 mutants and their respective WT plants at V3 stage were caged with 6 FAW neonates per plant.FAW larvae were removed from the plants, and larval weight was analyzed 7 days post-infestation.Bars means ± SE (n ≥ 25 FAW larvae removed from 5 different maize plants).Asterisks represent statistically significant differences between WT and mutant (Student's t-test, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01).(C) BAW larval Figure 1.ZmOPR2 promotes insect resistance.(A) The fourth leaf of opr2-1 and its WT at V4 stage were caged and infested with one 3rd instar FAW larva per leaf.The leaves were scanned after the

Figure 5 .
Figure 5. ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 act synergistically in the regulation of defense against FAW.(A) Average leaf consumed area of opr2-1 (gray bar), lox10-3 (red bar), and lox10opr2 (slashed bar) mutants and their WT after FAW infestation.Eaten leaf area is the sum of all the damaged areas on one leaf.Bars are means ± SE (n ≥ 6 maize plants).(B) Average FAW larval weight gain after feeding on opr2-1 (gray bar), lox10-3 (red bar), and lox10opr2 (slashed bar) mutants and WT for 7 days.Bars are means ± SE (n ≥ 20 larvae from 5 different plants).Different letters indicate statistically significant differences in log-transformed data (Tukey's HSD test, p < 0.05).

Figure 5 .
Figure 5. ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 act synergistically in the regulation of defense against FAW.(A) Average leaf consumed area of opr2-1 (gray bar), lox10-3 (red bar), and lox10opr2 (slashed bar) mutants and their WT after FAW infestation.Eaten leaf area is the sum of all the damaged areas on one leaf.Bars are means ± SE (n ≥ 6 maize plants).(B) Average FAW larval weight gain after feeding on opr2-1 (gray bar), lox10-3 (red bar), and lox10opr2 (slashed bar) mutants and WT for 7 days.Bars are means ± SE (n ≥ 20 larvae from 5 different plants).Different letters indicate statistically significant differences in log-transformed data (Tukey's HSD test, p < 0.05).

Figure 6 .
Figure 6.Mutations of both ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 suppressed WCR larval survival and development.(A) Larvae recovery and (B) Larval mass were recorded 10 days post-infestation, and (C) the developmental stages of the larvae recovered were determined by measuring larvae head capsules using ImageJ (D) Root ratio was analyzed as larvae damaged over undamaged root mass to determine tolerance in opr2-1 (gray bar), lox10-3 (red bar), and lox10opr2 (slashed bar) mutants after comparing to WT. Bars are means ± SE.Asterisks represent statistically significant differences (A,B,D-Tukey HSD and C-Dunnett's Test, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01).

Figure 6 .
Figure 6.Mutations of both ZmOPR2 and ZmLOX10 suppressed WCR larval survival and development.(A) Larvae recovery and (B) Larval mass were recorded 10 days post-infestation, and (C) the developmental stages of the larvae recovered were determined by measuring larvae head capsules using ImageJ (D) Root ratio was analyzed as larvae damaged over undamaged root mass to determine tolerance in opr2-1 (gray bar), lox10-3 (red bar), and lox10opr2 (slashed bar) mutants after comparing to WT. Bars are means ± SE.Asterisks represent statistically significant differences (A,B,D-Tukey HSD and C-Dunnett's Test, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01).

Author Contributions:
Designed the research and analyzed the data, P.-C.H., J.M.G., J.S.B. and M.V.K.; performed the FAW and BAW bioassays and drafted the article, P.-C.H.; conducted the WCR bioassays and helped draft the manuscript, J.M.G.; performed the oxylipin profiling, K.M.B.-F.; generated Arabidopsis overexpression lines, J.P.T. and H.K.; wrote the article with input from and revisions by J.P.T., J.S.B. and H.K.-P.-C.H., J.M.G. and M.V.K.All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.Funding: This study was supported by USDA-NIFA Grant No. 2015-67013-22816 awarded to M.V.K. and H.K., and USDA-NIFA 2017-67013-26524 awarded to M.V.K., and USDA-NIFA 2021-67013-33568 grant awarded to M.V.K. and J.S.B.Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.