Next Article in Journal
Pathogen Stopping and Metabolism Modulation Are Key Points to Linum usitatissimum L. Early Response against Fusarium oxysporum
Next Article in Special Issue
Transcriptome Analyses Revealed the Wax and Phenylpropanoid Biosynthesis Pathways Related to Disease Resistance in Rootstock-Grafted Cucumber
Previous Article in Journal
Cross-Compatibility in Interspecific Hybridization of Different Curcuma Accessions
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Plants
Volume 12
Issue 10
10.3390/plants12101962
plants-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

CaWRKY50 Acts as a Negative Regulator in Response to Colletotrichum scovillei Infection in Pepper

by
Yang Li
1,
Xiao Ma
1,
Luo-Dan Xiao
2,
Ya-Nan Yu
1,
Hui-Ling Yan
3,* and
Zhen-Hui Gong
1,*
1
College of Horticulture, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, China
2
Yibin Research Institute of Tea Industry, Yibin 644000, China
3
Institute of Cash Crops, Hebei Academy of Agricultural and Forestry Sciences, Shijiazhuang 050051, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Plants 2023, 12(10), 1962; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12101962
Submission received: 5 April 2023 / Revised: 2 May 2023 / Accepted: 9 May 2023 / Published: 11 May 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Vegetable Crops Disease Resistance Mechanism)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Chili anthracnose is one of the most common and destructive fungal pathogens that affects the yield and quality of pepper. Although WRKY proteins play crucial roles in pepper resistance to a variety of pathogens, the mechanism of their resistance to anthracnose is still unknown. In this study, we found that CaWRKY50 expression was obviously induced by Colletotrichum scovillei infection and salicylic acid (SA) treatments. CaWRKY50-silencing enhanced pepper resistance to C. scovillei, while transient overexpression of CaWRKY50 in pepper increased susceptibility to C. scovillei. We further found that overexpression of CaWRKY50 in tomatoes significantly decreased resistance to C. scovillei by SA and reactive oxygen species (ROS) signaling pathways. Moreover, CaWRKY50 suppressed the expression of two SA-related genes, CaEDS1 (enhanced disease susceptibility 1) and CaSAMT1 (salicylate carboxymethyltransferase 1), by directly binding to the W-box motif in their promoters. Additionally, we demonstrated that CaWRKY50 interacts with CaWRKY42 and CaMIEL1 in the nucleus. Thus, our findings revealed that CaWRKY50 plays a negative role in pepper resistance to C. scovillei through the SA-mediated signaling pathway and the antioxidant defense system. These results provide a theoretical foundation for molecular breeding of pepper varieties resistant to anthracnose.

1. Introduction

Pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) is one of the most commercially significant vegetables in the world [1]. However, pepper cultivation is often damaged by pathogenic fungi, including chili anthracnose caused by Colletotrichum spp. [2]. Among these fungi, C. scovillei is one of the most devastating fungal diseases in pepper [3]. Currently, traditional chemical treatments are widely used to control chili anthracnose, but they are harmful to the environment and can negatively impact food safety. The breeding of resistant pepper varieties is the most effective and economical approach to controlling plant pathogens [4]. Therefore, it is important to study the mechanisms of pepper resistance to anthracnose.
Salicylic acid (SA) serves as a vital hormone for plant defense and plays a crucial role in many aspects of plant immunity. SA is involved not only in systemic acquired resistance (SAR) but also in PAMP-triggered immunity (PTI) and effector-triggered immunity (ETI) [5]. The PTI and ETI immune systems cooperate to promote downstream responses, leading to the production of ROS and plant hormones, as well as the activation of a hypersensitive response (HR) to trigger associated defense mechanisms [6]. When plants are attacked by pathogens, SA stimulates the synthesis of pathogenesis-related (PR) proteins involved in plant defense [7]. Under stress combinations, plants can enhance their levels of antioxidant enzymes to decrease ROS (particularly H2O2 and O2−) accumulation and reduce their damage by maintaining a dynamic balance [8].
Salicylate carboxymethyltransferase (SAMT) converts SA to methyl salicylate (MeSA) and plays a key role in controlling SA synthesis, affecting the defense response to pathogens in tomatoes [9,10]. CsWRKY70 regulates citrus fruit resistance against P. digitatum by activating the expression of CsSAMT [11]. EDS1 is required for innate immunity, and the EDS1-mediated SA-signaling pathway is important for pathogen resistance [12]. Further research has shown that EDS1 interacts with PAD4 (phytoalexin deficiency 4) and SAG101 (senescence-associated gene 101) to trigger immunity, which are essential regulators of plant defense against various pathogens [13].
WRKY transcription factors (TF), which contain a conserved WRKYGQK sequence, play important roles in pathogen-response signaling networks [14]. Previous studies have shown that many WRKY proteins are involved in SA-mediated defense signaling pathways. WRKY38 and WRKY62 expression in Arabidopsis were induced by SA and participated in SA signaling pathways [15]. While VqWRKY31 in grapevines improves powdery mildew resistance by SA defense signaling [16]. In apples, MdWRKY17 promoted the expression of MdDMR6 (SA degradation gene), resulting in a decreased response to C. fructicola inoculation [17]. In citrus, exogenous SA regulates CsWRKY70 expression and MeSA synthesis to enhance resistance against Penicillium digitatum [11]. In tobacco, NbWRKY40 regulates the expression of SA-related genes in response to tomato mosaic virus resistance [18].
Numerous studies have demonstrated the critical role of WRKY transcription factors (TFs) in pepper defense responses to pathogen inoculation. CaWRKY40 is involved in various biological processes and plays a crucial function in the response to Ralstonia solanacearum (RSI) infection [19,20,21]. Previous research has revealed that CaWRKY27 [22], CaWRKY6 [23], CaWRKY22 [24], CaWRKY41 [25], CaWRKY30 [26], CaWRKY28 [27], and CaWRKY27b [19] positively regulate resistance response to RSI, while CaWRKY58 [28] and CaWRKY40b [29] negatively regulate it. However, the regulatory mechanism of pepper resistance to anthracnose remains unclear. Therefore, it is of great significance to explore the molecular mechanism of resistance to anthracnose in pepper.
In this study, we isolated the CaWRKY50 TF from the anthracnose-susceptible cultivar cv. R25, which was markedly induced by C. scovillei inoculation and SA treatments. Silencing of CaWRKY50 increased pepper fruit resistance to C. scovillei, while overexpression of CaWRKY50 decreased anthracnose resistance in pepper and tomato fruits. Moreover, CaWRKY50 specifically binds to the CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1 gene promoters and suppresses their expression. In the nucleus, CaWRKY50 interacts with CaWRKY42 and CaMIEL1. Our study demonstrates that CaWRKY50 negatively regulates pepper fruit resistance to C. scovillei through SA and ROS signaling pathways.

2. Results

2.1. Characterization of CaWRKY50

To explore the potential function of CaWRKY50 in response to anthracnose, we used qRT-PCR to investigate any change in CaWRKY50 expression in the susceptible cv. R25 under C. scovillei infection. We found that CaWRKY50 expression was significantly induced from 1 to 7 dpi compared to before infection, indicating that CaWRKY50 was involved in disease resistance following C. scovillei infection in pepper fruits (Figure 1a). The coding sequence of CaWRKY50 (Capana10g001548) was cloned from cv. R25 and encodes a protein consisting of 232 amino acids. Phylogenetic analysis revealed that CaWRKY50 was highly identical to NtWRKY70 (XP_016492893.1) and homologous to AtWRKY54 (AT2G40750.1), SlWRKY81 (NP_001266272.1), StWRKY6 (NP_001275414.1), VvWRKY70 (XP_002275401.1), CsWRKY70 (KAH9673391.1), OsWRKY41 (XP_015638413.1), and TaWRKY19 (XP_04438106) based on BLAST analysis in the NCBI database (Figure 1b). The CaWRKY50 protein contained one conserved WRKYGQK domain, a C2HC zinc finger, and was clustered in subgroup III members (Figure 1c).
To understand the effect of SA and jasmonic acid (JA) on pepper fruit resistance against C. scovillei, we analyzed the expression patterns of the CaWRKY50 gene after treatment with 5 mM SA and 100 μM JA. The results show that CaWRKY50 was strongly induced at 3–12 hpt with 5 mM SA but did not respond to 100 μM JA (Figure 1d). We also analyzed the transcript levels of CaWRKY50 following C. scovillei infection after exogenous 5 mM SA treatment using qRT-PCR. The results indicate that CaWRKY50 expression was significantly decreased compared to the control at 2 and 7 dpi (Figure 1e). These findings imply that the response of CaWRKY50 to C. scovillei may be related to SA signaling pathways.
Sequence analysis using the PSORT online program revealed that the predicted CaWRKY50 protein contains two putative nuclear localization signals (Figure 1c). To confirm this speculation, the recombinant CaWRKY50-GFP protein was transiently expressed in tobacco epidermal cells. The results show that the CaWRKY50-GFP protein only appeared in the nucleus, while the empty GFP protein was present throughout the cell (Figure 1f). To analyze the transcriptional activity of CaWRKY50, we used the yeast two-hybrid (Y2H) system. The positive control grew well and turned blue in the SD/-Leu/-Trp/-Ade/-His medium with X-α-gal (20 μg mL−1), while pGBKT7-CaWRKY50 and the negative control did not express X-α-gal activity (Figure 1g). These results suggest that CaWRKY50 has no transcriptional activity in yeast cells.

2.2. CaWRKY50 Silencing Improves Pepper Resistance to C. scovillei

To investigate the function of CaWRKY50 in anthracnose resistance, we downregulated its expression on detached pepper fruits (cv. R25) using virus-induced gene silencing (VIGS) methods. CaWRKY50 expression was significantly lower in silenced pepper fruits compared to control fruits at 15 days post-infiltration, which indicates that CaWRKY50 were successfully silenced (Figure 2a). The phenotypic symptoms and lesion diameters of CaWRKY50-silenced fruits were considerably smaller in comparison to control fruits at 7 dpi (Figure 2b,c). Furthermore, the contents of malondialdehyde (MDA) and H2O2 in CaWRKY50-silenced fruits were remarkably lower than those in control fruits at 7 dpi (Figure 2d,e). Conversely, the catalase (CAT), peroxidase (POD), and superoxide dismutase (SOD) activities of CaWRKY50-silenced fruits were significantly higher at 7 dpi (Figure 2f–h).
Furthermore, the expression of CaWRKY50 was markedly lower in CaWRKY50-silenced fruits compared to control fruits at 4 and 7 dpi (Figure 3a). To determine whether CaWRKY50 affects the expression of SA and ROS defense-related genes in pepper, qRT-PCR was used to evaluate the expression levels of these genes at various days after C. scovillei infection. The transcript levels of CaPR1, CaPR10, CaSAR8.2, and CaPO1 (SA-related genes) were significantly increased in CaWRKY50-silenced fruits relative to control fruits at 7 dpi (Figure 3b–e). Similarly, the transcript patterns of CaCAT, CaPOD, and CaSOD (ROS-related genes) were consistent with the SA-related genes (Figure 3f–h). Overall, these results indicate that silencing CaWRKY50 improves the resistance of pepper fruits to C. scovillei.

2.3. Transient CaWRKY50 Overexpression Enhances Susceptibility to C. scovillei in Pepper

To further explore the role of CaWRKY50 in disease resistance to anthracnose, we performed transient overexpression of CaWRKY50 in detached pepper fruits (cv. R25) and infected them with C. scovillei. CaWRKY50 was successfully overexpressed in the pepper fruits, as confirmed by qRT-PCR analysis at 3 days post-infiltration (Figure 4a). The disease symptoms and lesion diameters of CaWRKY50-overexpressing fruits were markedly larger than those of control fruits at 7 dpi (Figure 4b,c). Additionally, MDA and H2O2 levels in CaWRKY50-overexpressing fruits were dramatically increased compared to the control fruits at 7 dpi (Figure 4d,e). Furthermore, the CAT, POD, and SOD activities of CaWRKY50-overexpressing fruits were significantly lower than those of control fruits at 7 dpi (Figure 4f–h).
Additionally, CaWRKY50 expression was obviously increased in CaWRKY50-overexpressing fruits compared to control fruits at 4 and 7 dpi (Figure 5a). To understand whether CaWRKY50 regulates the expression of SA and ROS-related defense genes, we analyzed the transcript levels of these genes in CaWRKY50-overexpressing fruits as well as control fruits at various days after C. scovillei infection. The transcript levels of CaPR1, CaPR10, CaSAR8.2, and CaPO1 (SA-related genes) were downregulated in the CaWRKY50-overexpressing fruits relative to the control at 7 dpi (Figure 5b–e). Similarly, the expression patterns of CaCAT, CaPOD and CaSOD (ROS-related genes) were consistent with the SA-related genes under C. scovillei infection at 7 dpi (Figure 5f–h). Taken together, our data show that CaWRKY50 negatively regulates pepper fruit resistance to C. scovillei.

2.4. Overexpression of CaWRKY50 in Tomato Decreases Resistance to C. scovillei

To better understand the function of CaWRKY50 in anthracnose resistance, CaWRKY50 was stably expressed in tomato by Agrobacterium-mediated genetic transformation. Three transgenic T2 lines (OE-97, OE-110, and OE-113) with high levels of CaWRKY50 transcript (Figure 6a) were infected with C. scovillei to assess the role of CaWRKY50 in anthracnose resistance. At 3 dpi, the transgenic fruits exhibited greater lesion diameters than WT fruits (Figure 6b,c). MDA and H2O2 content were evaluated in OE and WT fruits, and compared to WT fruits, MDA and H2O2 levels were greatly increased in OE fruits at 3 dpi (Figure 6d,e). Moreover, the activities of CAT, POD, and SOD were obviously lower in OE fruits than WT fruits at 3 dpi (Figure 6f–h).
Additionally, we analyzed the expression levels of SA and ROS related defense genes in both CaWRKY50-overexpressing and control fruits. The transcript patterns of SA-related genes SlPR1, SlNPR1, and SlSABP2 were markedly downregulated in CaWKRY50 OE fruits compared to WT fruits at 3 dpi (Figure 6i–k). Consistently, the transcript patterns of the ROS-related genes SlPOD, SlAPX2, and SlCAT were also significantly downregulated in OE fruits relative to WT fruits at 3 dpi (Figure 6l–n). In conclusion, our studies demonstrate that CaWRKY50 has a negative regulatory effect on tomato fruit resistance to C. scovillei.

2.5. CaWRKY50 Specifically Binds the Promoter of CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1

To identify which genes are directly regulated by CaWRKY50 for anthracnose resistance in pepper, we looked for two SA-related defense genes (CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1), whose promoters contain W-box elements (TTGACC/T). Subsequently, we performed yeast one-hybrid (Y1H) assays to confirm whether CaWRKY50 binds to the promoter of CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1. We transformed CaWRKY50-pGADT7 into the Y1H strain by integrating the proCaEDS1/proCaSAMT1-pAbAi vector, which produced yeast cells that grew well on SD/-Leu medium with 150 and 250 ng ml−1 AbA. In contrast, the negative control failed to grow (Figure 7a). The Y1H assay confirmed that CaWRKY50 specifically binds to the promoters of CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1.
To investigate the effect of CaWRKY50 on the promoters of CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1, we performed GUS activity and dual-luciferase assays in tobacco leaves. The staining intensity and activity of GUS were significantly decreased compared to the control when CaWRKY50-pGADT7 was co-expressed with the proCaEDS1/proCaSAMT1-GUS vector in tobacco leaves (Figure 7b,c). Furthermore, we observed that the luciferase activity was significantly inhibited compared to control when CaWRKY50:62-SK was co-expressed with the proCaEDS1/proCaSAMT1-LUC vector in tobacco leaves (Figure 7d,e). Taken together, these results indicate that CaWRKY50 specifically binds to the promoters of CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1, suppressing their expression in response to C. scovillei.

2.6. CaWRKY50 Interacts with CaWRKY42 and CaMIEL1

In order to identify the interacting partner of CaWRKY50 in the regulation of pepper defense responses, we screened a pepper cDNA library by Y2H assay and isolated CaWRKY42 (Capana08g001044) and CaMIEL1 (XM_016719768) as CaWRKY50-interacting proteins. CaMIEL1 encodes a RING E3 ubiquitin-protein ligase. Subsequently, we carried out a Y2H assay to confirm whether CaWRKY50 interacted with CaWRKY42/CaMIEL1. The yeast cells co-transformed with CaWRKY50-pGBKT7 and CaWRKY42/CaMIEL1-pGADT7 plasmid combinations were viable on SD/-Leu/-Trp/-Ade/-His medium and turned blue in X-α-gal (20 μg mL−1) (Figure 8a). This confirmed that CaWRKY50 strongly interacted with CaWRKY42 and CaMIEL1.
Moreover, we performed luciferase complementation imaging (LCI) and bimolecular fluorescence complementation (BiFC) assays to confirm the interactions in living plant cells. In the LCl assay, we transiently co-expressed CaWRKY50-nLUC and CaWRKY42/CaMIEL1-cLUC in tobacco leaves and found luminescence signals in the co-expressed CaWRKY50-nLUC and CaWRKY42/CaMIEL1-cLUC regions but not in controls (Figure 8b). In the BiFC assay, we transiently co-expressed CaWRKY50-nYFP and CaWRKY42/CaMIEL1-cYFP in tobacco leaves and observed the interaction between CaWRKY50 and CaWRKY42/CaMIEL1 generating YFP fluorescence in the nucleus (Figure 8c). In summary, our data demonstrate that CaWRKY50 interacts with CaWRKY42/CaMIEL1 in the nucleus.

3. Discussion

WRKY proteins play a critical role in plant resistance to various pathogens. According to the Zunla-1 genome sequence, a total of 62 WRKY genes have been identified in pepper [30]. In our study, we selected CaWRKY50 as a candidate gene based on previous RNA-seq and VIGS analysis. Sequence analysis indicated that CaWRKY50 is highly homologous with NtWRKY70 in tobacco, AtWRKY54 in Arabidopsis, and CsWRKY70 in citrus. These proteins belong to subgroup III members (Figure 1b,c), for which AtWRKY54 plays a positive regulatory role in pathogen infection and a negative regulatory role in leaf senescence [31,32]. CsWRKY70 actively participates in SA-mediated disease resistance by regulating the transcription of the CsSAMT genes [11]. Thus, it was speculated that CaWRKY50 might also be involved in plant disease resistance. However, the underlying molecular mechanism of CaWRKY50 in pepper anthracnose resistance remains unknown, and further investigation is needed to understand its function.
In this study, a transactivation assay was used to investigate CaWRKY50’s role in transcriptional activity, and it was found that it did not possess transcriptional activity in yeast cells (Figure 1g). Similar findings have been reported for grapevine VvWRKY8 [33], maize ZmWRKY17 [34], soybean GmWRKY13, GmWRKY27, GmWRKY40, GmWRKY54 [35], and Brachypodium distachyon BdWRKY36 [36]. This phenomenon could be explained by the fact that the activation of these proteins may be dependent on posttranslational modifications or require activation by unknown upstream proteins [37].
In this study, the transcript levels of CaWRKY50 were markedly induced by C. scovillei and SA treatments, as shown in Figure 1a,d. By performing VIGS, we found that CaWRKY50-silencing enhanced pepper resistance to C. scovillei inoculation (Figure 2 and Figure 3). Also, CaWRKY50 overexpression resulted in enhanced susceptibility to infection with C. scovillei in pepper and tomato fruits (Figure 4, Figure 5 and Figure 6). These results suggest that CaWRKY50 acts as a negative regulator of pepper resistance to C. scovillei.
Recently, studies have revealed that plants can actively generate ROS, which can affect a variety of physiological processes, including biotic and abiotic stress as well as pathogen defense [8]. To counteract ROS damage, plants possess a comprehensive antioxidative system that reduces ROS damage and maintains cell homeostasis [38]. Malondialdehyde (MDA) is the main product of membrane lipid peroxidation and is commonly used as a marker for oxidative stress in plants [39]. For instance, overexpression of CaCIPK13 in pepper enhanced cold tolerance by regulating the antioxidant defense system, which increased CAT, POD, and SOD activities while decreasing MDA and H2O2 content [40]. Similarly, CaCIPK3-overexpression improved drought stress resistance in pepper by increasing CAT, POD, and SOD activities, while decreasing MDA and H2O2 content [41]. Hence, we measured the contents of MDA and H2O2 as well as the levels of ROS scavenging enzymes (CAT, POD, and SOD) in CaWRKY50-overexpressing and CaWRKY50-silenced fruits under C. scovillei infection. Our results revealed that the contents of MDA and H2O2 in CaWRKY50-overexpressing fruits were noticeably higher than control fruits under C. scovillei infection (Figure 4 and Figure 6). In contrast, the results were reversed in CaWRKY50-silenced fruits, as shown in Figure 2. Furthermore, the activities of CAT, POD, and SOD in CaWRKY50-overexpressing fruits were significantly lower than control fruits under C. scovillei infection (Figure 4 and Figure 6), which was contrary to CaWRKY50-silenced fruits (Figure 2). To corroborate these findings, we measured the expression of ROS-scavenging genes (CaCAT/SlCAT, CaPOD/SlPOD, CaSOD, and SlAPX2) using qRT-PCR and found that the results were consistent with ROS-scavenging enzyme activity results (Figure 3, Figure 5, and Figure 6). These findings suggest that CaWRKY50 plays a crucial role in regulating oxidative stress caused by C. scovillei infection.
SA signaling is known to play a key role in regulating the defense response of plants to pathogenic infections. Previous studies have shown that SA-related defense genes can be induced by SA to modulate plant defense responses to pathogen infection. [42]. Previous results indicated that CaSBP12, CaSBP08, and CaSBP11 negatively regulated pepper resistance to phytophthora capsici by inhibiting the transcript of SA-related defense genes [39,43,44]. In another study, VaERF16-overexpressing improved disease resistance to B. cinerea in Arabidopsis thaliana by increasing the expression of AtPR1 and AtNPR1 [45]. Our research revealed that the transcript levels of CaPR1, CaPR10, CaSAR8.2, and CaPO1 were significantly downregulated in transient CaWRKY50-overexpression pepper fruits in comparison to control fruits at 7 dpi. (Figure 5). In contrast, these genes were dramatically upregulated in CaWRKY50-silenced pepper fruits at 7 dpi (Figure 3). Furthermore, the expression of SlPR1, SlNPR1, and SlSABP2 in CaWRKY50-overexpressing tomato fruits was markedly lower than in control fruits at 7 dpi (Figure 6i–k). In summary, these results indicate that CaWRKY50 acts as a negative regulator in response to C. scovillei through the SA signaling pathway.
WRKY TFs can specifically bind to W-box cis-elements (TTGACC/T) to regulate the expression of defense-associated genes. The expression of SA signaling-related genes (TGA2 and TGA6) was increased by WRKY70, which directly bound their promoter elements to regulate Verticillium dahliae toxin infection [46]. In the absence of a pathogen, WRKY70 is directly bound to the promoter of SARD1 to repress its expression and regulate the expression of SA-related genes [47]. In another study, MdWRKY17 specifically bound to the MdDMR6 promoter to enhance its expression, which negatively regulated resistance to C. fructicola in apples [17]. In the present study, we found that CaWRKY50 specifically binds to the promoter of CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1 by Y1H (Figure 7a). To elucidate how CaWRKY50 regulates the expression of CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1, we conducted GUS activity and dual-luciferase assays, which demonstrate that CaWRKY50 could inhibit CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1 transcription (Figure 7b–e). In plants, SAMT catalyzes SA to produce MeSA. CsWRKY70 specifically binds to the promoter of CsSAMT and activates its expression, thereby positively regulating resistance to Penicillium digitatum in citrus fruit [11]. EDS1 plays an important function in plant basal defense and the SA signaling pathway [12]. PcAvh103 interacts with EDS1 to inhibit plant immunity by the EDS1-PAD4 signaling pathway [48]. These findings suggest that CaWRKY50 can suppress the expression of CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1 to reduce disease resistance.
WRKY proteins can interact with other proteins to regulate plant immunity [14]. For example, WRKY33 interacts with WRKY12 to increase hypoxia tolerance in Arabidopsis [49]. JrWRKY21 was shown to improve walnut resistance to C. gloeosporioides by interacting with JrPTI5L (a PR protein) [50]. SlWRKY31 interacts with SlVQ15 to regulate the resistance to B. cinerea in tomatoes [51]. It is plausible that the CaWRKY50 protein also interacts with other defense proteins in response to various pathogen infections. In this study, we determined the interaction between CaWRKY50 with CaWRKY42/CaMIEL1 through Y2H, LCI, and BiFC assays (Figure 8). A previous study showed that CaWRKY41 (CA08g08240), which is the same gene as CaWRKY42 (Capana08g001044) in our study, could positively regulate pepper resistance to R. solanacearum inoculation [25]. CaMIEL1, an E3 ubiquitin ligase, inhibited tolerance to bacterial inoculation in Arabidopsis by degrading MYB30 [52]. These results suggest that CaWRKY50 may regulate resistance to C. scovillei by interacting with CaWRKY42 and CaMIEL1.
In conclusion, using overexpression and silenced techniques, we demonstrated that CaWRKY50 serves as a negative regulator in response to C. scovillei through the SA and ROS signaling pathways. CaWRKY50 directly binds to the promoters of CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1 to suppress their expression. Furthermore, CaWRKY50 participates in disease resistance by interacting with CaWRKY42 and CaMIEL1 (Figure 9). Our findings shed light on the mechanisms by which WRKY50 functions in response to anthracnose resistance.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Plant Materials, Pathogen Inoculation, and Phytohormone Treatment

Pepper (Capsicum annuum, cv. R25), which was used for VIGS and transient overexpression assays, was cultivated in a solar greenhouse at the horticultural farm of Northwest A&F University, Shaanxi, China. The tobacco (Nicotiana benthamiana) was used for transient transformation. The tomato (Solanum lycopersicum, cv. Micro-Tom) was used for stable genetic transformation. Tomato and tobacco seedlings were grown in growth chambers at 24/18 °C under a 16/8 h photoperiod day/night cycle.
C. scovillei (SXBJ23) were cultured on potato dextrose agar (PDA) medium at 28 °C for 7 days. For pathogen inoculation assays, mature fruits were inoculated with C. scovillei using the previously described method [53]. In brief, the surfaces of mature fruits were injected with 2 μL of suspension (5 × 105 spores mL−1) using the microinjection method [54]. The inoculated fruits were stored at 28 °C for 7 days. Measurements of lesion diameter (LD) were performed by the crossing method as previously described [55]. Pepper fruit samples were collected at 0, 1, 2, 4, and 7 days post incubation (dpi). Tomato fruit samples were collected at 0 and 3 dpi. Three biological replicates were performed for each treatment.
For the study of CaWRKY50 transcript levels in response to SA and JA, cv. R25 mature fruits were soaked with 5 mM SA and 100 μM MeJA for 1 h [22]. Control fruits were soaked in sterile water. The pepper pericarps were collected after 0, 3, 6, 12, and 24 h post treatment (hpt) and then inoculated with 2 μL of C. scovillei after 24 hpt. Pepper fruits were stored at 28 °C for 7 days.

4.2. RNA Extraction and qRT-PCR Analysis

The total RNA was extracted by the RNAprep pure plant kit (TSP411, Tsingke, Beijing, China) according to the manufacturer’s protocol. The first-strand cDNA was synthesized using ToloScript RT EasyMix (22106, Tolobio, Shanghai, China). qRT-PCR analysis was performed using the SYBR Green Master qPCR Mix (TSE201, Tsingke, Beijing, China). CaUBI3 (AY486137) and SlACTIN (NM_001308447.1) were used as reference genes for pepper and tomato to normalize transcript levels according to the 2−ΔΔCt method. Each qRT-PCR experiment consisted of three biological replicates. The qRT-PCR primers listed in Supplemental Table S1.

4.3. Phylogenetic Analysis and Subcellular Localization

To analyze the relationship between CaWRKY50 and its homologs, the WRKY TFs, the protein sequence alignment was carried out by the DNAMAN software. The construction of the phylogenetic tree was performed using MEGA X software according to neighbor-joining (NJ).
The PSORT online program (https://www.genscript.com/psort.html (accessed on 26 April 2023)) was used to predict the subcellular localization of the CaWRKY50 protein. To confirm the subcellular localization, the coding sequence of CaWRKY50 without the stop codon was inserted into pVBG2307-GFP vectors. The recombinant construct (pVBG2307-CaWRKY50-GFP) was transformed into Agrobacterium tumefaciens strain GV3101 and then transiently infiltrated into tobacco (Nicotiana benthamiana) leaves. The empty vector serves as a negative control. The GFP fluorescence signals were detected using a BX63 Olympus (Tokyo, Japan) after 2–3 days. Fluorescence was evaluated using at least three independent replicates.

4.4. Transcriptional Activity Assays in Yeast

The coding sequence of CaWRKY50 was amplified and cloned into the pGBKT7 vector to investigate the transcriptional activity. Co-transformation of the CaWRKY50-pGBKT7 recombinant vector and the pGADT7-T empty vector into Y2H yeast cells according to the manufacturer’s procedures (PT1183, Shaanxi Pyeast Bio.CO.LTD, Shaanxi, China). Transformants were cultured on SD/-Leu/-Trp/-Ade/-His medium containing X-α-gal (20 μg/mL) at 30 °C for 3 days.

4.5. Virus-Induced Gene Silencing (VIGS)

For the VIGS assays, CaWRKY50 silencing was performed following a previously reported procedure [56]. To generate the CaWRKY50-silenced vector, a 300 bp fragment of CaWRKY50 was obtained using the VIGS Tool (https://vigs.solgenomics.net/ (accessed on 4 December 2019)). The Agrobacterium tumefaciens strain GV3101 cells containing TRV2:00 and TRV2:CaWRKY50 were combined in a 1:1 ratio with TRV1 and then infiltrated into detached mature pepper fruits of cv. R25. The treated pepper fruits were placed in growth chambers at 24/18 °C under a 16/8 h photoperiod day/night cycle. After 15 days of infiltration, the transcript levels of CaWRKY50 were measured by qRT-PCR, and then the fruits were injected with 2 μL C. scovillei. Pepper fruit samples were collected at 0, 1, 2, 4, and 7 dpi, and the lesion diameters were measured at 7 dpi. Three biological replicates were performed for each treatment. The experiment was repeated three times with similar results.

4.6. Transient and Transgenic Overexpression

We carried out transient overexpression assays by A. tumefaciens-mediated infiltration [57]. The fusion protein pVBG2307-CaWRKY50-GFP was infiltrated into detached mature pepper fruits of cv. R25. The expression level of CaWRKY50 was detected at 3 days post-infiltration by qRT-PCR, and the fruits were subsequently inoculated with 2 μL C. scovillei. Pepper fruit samples were collected at 0, 1, 4, and 7 dpi, and the lesion diameters were measured at 7 dpi. Three biological replicates were performed for each treatment. The experiment was repeated three times with similar results.
The transgenic overexpression assays were performed as previously reported methods, with slight modifications [58]. Transcript levels in transgenic plants were evaluated by qRT-PCR. T2 transgenic lines (OE-97, OE-110, and OE-113) were employed for further investigation. The mature red fruits were inoculated with 2 μL of C. scovillei at 28 °C for 3 days. Fruit samples were collected at 0 and 3 dpi, and the lesion diameters were measured at 3 dpi. Three biological replicates were performed for each treatment.

4.7. Measurement of Physiological Indicators

The content of malondialdehyde (MDA) was detected according to the previously described method [40]. The catalase (CAT), peroxidase (POD), and superoxide dismutase (SOD) activities as well as H2O2 contents were quantified using the corresponding assay kits (Sangon Biotech, Shanghai, China) in accordance with the manufacturer’s procedures. Three biological replicates were performed for each determination. The experiment was repeated three times with similar results.

4.8. Protein Interaction Assays

The coding sequence of CaWRKY50 was cloned into the pGBKT7 vector as the bait, and the coding sequences of CaWRKY42 and CaMIEL1 were cloned into the pGADT7 vector as the prey. Co-transformation of the bait and prey vectors into Y2H yeast cells according to the manufacturer’s procedures (PT1183, Shaanxi Pyeast Bio.CO.LTD, Shaanxi, China). The protein interactions were screened using SD/-Leu/-Trp/-Ade/-His medium containing X-α-gal (20 μg/mL).
For the luciferase complementation imaging (LCI) assays, the coding sequences of CaWRKY42 and CaMIEL1 were cloned into the pCAMBIA-cLUC vector, and the coding sequence of CaWRKY50 was cloned into the pCAMBIA-nLUC vector. Agrobacterium tumefaciens GV3101 harboring 35S:CaWRKY50-nLUC and 35S:CaWRKY42/CaMIEL1-cLUC were co-infiltrated in N. benthamiana leaves. After 2 days of infiltration, 1 mM Beetle luciferin (E1601, Promega, Madison, WI, USA) was sprayed onto the inoculation leaves, and the luciferase images were captured (Lumazone Pylon 2048B, Princeton, NJ, USA). The LCI assays were carried out as previously reported [59].
For the bimolecular fluorescence complementation (BiFC) assays, the recombinant constructs CaWRKY50-pSPYNE and CaWRKY42/CaMIEL1-pSPYCE were transformed into A. tumefaciens strain GV3101 and co-infiltrated in tobacco leaves. An automated fluorescence microscope (BX63, Olympus, Japan) was used to image YFP signals 2 days after infiltration. The BiFC assays were carried out as previously reported [60].

4.9. Yeast One-Hybrid (Y1H) Assay

The coding sequence of CaWRKY50 was cloned into the pGADT7 vector, and the CaEDS1 (799 bp) and CaSAMT1 (521 bp) promoter regions containing W-box elements (TTGACT/C) were cloned into the pAbAi vector as a bait vector. The restriction enzyme BstB1 was used to linearize the bait vectors before inserting them into Y1H Gold yeast cells. Then, these yeast cells were grown at 30 °C for 3 days on SD/-Leu medium with 150 and 250 ng mL−1 of Aureobasidin A (AbA).

4.10. GUS Activity Analysis and Dual Luciferase Reporter Assay

For the GUS activity analysis, the CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1 promoter regions were amplified from the genomic DNA of cv. R25 and inserted into the pCAMBIA1381-GUS vector as reporters. The effector plasmid, pVBG2307-CaWRKY50-GFP, was identical to that used in the previous subcellular localization assay. The recombinant constructs were transformed into A. tumefaciens strain GV3101 and co-infiltrated in tobacco leaves for 48 h. The GUS staining and enzyme activity detection methods were carried out as previously described [61].
For the dual luciferase reporter assays, the CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1 promoter regions were amplified from the genomic DNA of cv. R25 and inserted into the pGreenII-0800-LUC vector to generate a reporter construct. The coding sequence of CaWRKY50 was cloned into the pGreenII 62-SK vector to create an effector construct. The recombinant constructs were transformed into A. tumefaciens strain GV3101 (pSoup) and co-infiltrated in tobacco leaves for 48 h. The luciferase activity was measured according to the method in the Dual Luciferase Reporter Gene Assay Kit (11402ES60; Yeasen, Shanghai, China).

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/2223-7747/12/10/1962/s1, Table S1: Primers used in this study.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Y.L. and Z.-H.G.; methodology, Y.L.; software, L.-D.X.; validation, Y.L., X.M. and Z.-H.G.; formal analysis, Y.L.; investigation, Y.L. and Y.-N.Y.; resources, Z.-H.G.; data curation, X.M. and L.-D.X.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.L.; writing—review and editing, Z.-H.G.; visualization, X.M.; supervision, H.-L.Y. and Y.-N.Y.; funding acquisition, H.-L.Y. and Z.-H.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (No. 2016YFD0101900), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 31772309, No. 31860556), and the earmarked fund for CARS (CARS-24-G-01).

Data Availability Statement

All data supporting the findings of this study are available within the paper and its Supplementary Data. The GenBank accession numbers of ITS, ACT, and GAPDH for SXBJ23 are OQ119154, OQ127267, and OQ127268, respectively.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Qin, C.; Yu, C.; Shen, Y.; Fang, X.; Chen, L.; Min, J.; Cheng, J.; Zhao, S.; Xu, M.; Luo, Y.; et al. Whole-genome sequencing of cultivated and wild peppers provides insights into Capsicum domestication and specialization. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2014, 111, 5135–5140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  2. de Silva, D.D.; Groenewald, J.Z.; Crous, P.W.; Ades, P.K.; Nasruddin, A.; Mongkolporn, O.; Taylor, P.W.J. Identification, prevalence and pathogenicity of Colletotrichum species causing anthracnose of Capsicum annuum in Asia. IMA Fungus 2019, 10, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Lee, N.H.; Fu, T.; Shin, J.H.; Song, Y.W.; Jang, D.C.; Kim, K.S. The small GTPase CsRAC1 is important for fungal development and pepper anthracnose in Colletotrichum scovillei. Plant Pathol. J. 2021, 37, 607–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Zhao, Y.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Cao, Y.; Yu, H.; Ma, W.; Zhang, B.; Wang, R.; Gao, J.; Wang, L. Fine mapping of the major anthracnose resistance QTL AnR(GO)5 in Capsicum chinense ‘PBC932’. BMC Plant Biol. 2020, 20, 189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Zhang, Y.; Li, X. Salicylic acid: Biosynthesis, perception, and contributions to plant immunity. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2019, 50, 29–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Hou, Y.; Yu, X.; Chen, W.; Zhuang, W.; Wang, S.; Sun, C.; Cao, L.; Zhou, T.; Qu, S. MdWRKY75e enhances resistance to Alternaria alternata in Malus domestica. Hortic. Res. 2021, 8, 225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Zheng, X.Y.; Zhou, M.; Yoo, H.; Pruneda-Paz, J.L.; Spivey, N.W.; Kay, S.A.; Dong, X. Spatial and temporal regulation of biosynthesis of the plant immune signal salicylic acid. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2015, 112, 9166–9173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Choudhury, F.K.; Rivero, R.M.; Blumwald, E.; Mittler, R. Reactive oxygen species, abiotic stress and stress combination. Plant J. 2017, 90, 856–867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Tieman, D.; Zeigler, M.; Schmelz, E.; Taylor, M.G.; Rushing, S.; Jones, J.B.; Klee, H.J. Functional analysis of a tomato salicylic acid methyl transferase and its role in synthesis of the flavor volatile methyl salicylate. Plant J. 2010, 62, 113–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Ament, K.; Krasikov, V.; Allmann, S.; Rep, M.; Takken, F.L.; Schuurink, R.C. Methyl salicylate production in tomato affects biotic interactions. Plant J. 2010, 62, 124–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Deng, B.; Wang, W.; Ruan, C.; Deng, L.; Yao, S.; Zeng, K. Involvement of CsWRKY70 in salicylic acid-induced citrus fruit resistance against Penicillium digitatum. Hortic. Res. 2020, 7, 157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Qi, G.; Chen, J.; Chang, M.; Chen, H.; Hall, K.; Korin, J.; Liu, F.; Wang, D.; Fu, Z.Q. Pandemonium breaks out: Disruption of salicylic acid-mediated defense by plant pathogens. Mol. Plant 2018, 11, 1427–1439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  13. Zhu, S.; Jeong, R.D.; Venugopal, S.C.; Lapchyk, L.; Navarre, D.; Kachroo, A.; Kachroo, P. SAG101 forms a ternary complex with EDS1 and PAD4 and is required for resistance signaling against turnip crinkle virus. PLoS Pathog. 2011, 7, e1002318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Jiang, J.; Ma, S.; Ye, N.; Jiang, M.; Cao, J.; Zhang, J. WRKY transcription factors in plant responses to stresses. J. Integr. Plant Biol. 2017, 59, 86–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  15. Kim, K.C.; Lai, Z.; Fan, B.; Chen, Z. Arabidopsis WRKY38 and WRKY62 transcription factors interact with histone deacetylase 19 in basal defense. Plant Cell 2008, 20, 2357–2371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  16. Yin, W.; Wang, X.; Liu, H.; Wang, Y.; Nocker, S.; Tu, M.; Fang, J.; Guo, J.; Li, Z.; Wang, X. Overexpression of VqWRKY31 enhances powdery mildew resistance in grapevine by promoting salicylic acid signaling and specific metabolite synthesis. Hortic. Res. 2022, 9, uhab064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Shan, D.; Wang, C.; Zheng, X.; Hu, Z.; Zhu, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Jiang, A.; Zhang, H.; Shi, K.; Bai, Y.; et al. MKK4-MPK3-WRKY17-mediated salicylic acid degradation increases susceptibility to Glomerella leaf spot in apple. Plant Physiol. 2021, 186, 1202–1219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Jiang, Y.; Zheng, W.; Li, J.; Liu, P.; Zhong, K.; Jin, P.; Xu, M.; Yang, J.; Chen, J. NbWRKY40 Positively regulates the response of Nicotiana benthamiana to tomato mosaic virus via salicylic acid signaling. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 603518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Yang, S.; Cai, W.; Shen, L.; Cao, J.; Liu, C.; Hu, J.; Guan, D.; He, S. A CaCDPK29-CaWRKY27b module promotes CaWRKY40-mediated thermotolerance and immunity to Ralstonia solanacearum in pepper. New Phytol. 2022, 233, 1843–1863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Liu, Z.Q.; Shi, L.P.; Yang, S.; Qiu, S.S.; Ma, X.L.; Cai, J.S.; Guan, D.Y.; Wang, Z.H.; He, S.L. A conserved double-W box in the promoter of CaWRKY40 mediates autoregulation during response to pathogen attack and heat stress in pepper. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2021, 22, 3–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Dang, F.F.; Wang, Y.N.; Yu, L.; Eulgem, T.; Lai, Y.; Liu, Z.Q.; Wang, X.; Qiu, A.L.; Zhang, T.X.; Lin, J.; et al. CaWRKY40, a WRKY protein of pepper, plays an important role in the regulation of tolerance to heat stress and resistance to Ralstonia solanacearum infection. Plant Cell Environ. 2013, 36, 757–774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Dang, F.; Wang, Y.; She, J.; Lei, Y.; Liu, Z.; Eulgem, T.; Lai, Y.; Lin, J.; Yu, L.; Lei, D.; et al. Overexpression of CaWRKY27, a subgroup IIe WRKY transcription factor of Capsicum annuum, positively regulates tobacco resistance to Ralstonia solanacearum infection. Physiol. Plant. 2014, 150, 397–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Cai, H.; Yang, S.; Yan, Y.; Xiao, Z.; Cheng, J.; Wu, J.; Qiu, A.; Lai, Y.; Mou, S.; Guan, D.; et al. CaWRKY6 transcriptionally activates CaWRKY40, regulates Ralstonia solanacearum resistance, and confers high-temperature and high-humidity tolerance in pepper. J. Exp. Bot. 2015, 66, 3163–3174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  24. Hussain, A.; Li, X.; Weng, Y.; Liu, Z.; Ashraf, M.F.; Noman, A.; Yang, S.; Ifnan, M.; Qiu, S.; Yang, Y.; et al. CaWRKY22 acts as a positive regulator in pepper response to Ralstonia solanacearum by constituting networks with CaWRKY6, CaWRKY27, CaWRKY40, and CaWRKY58. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2018, 19, 1426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Dang, F.; Lin, J.; Chen, Y.; Li, G.X.; Guan, D.; Zheng, S.J.; He, S. A feedback loop between CaWRKY41 and H2O2 coordinates the response to Ralstonia solanacearum and excess cadmium in pepper. J. Exp. Bot. 2019, 70, 1581–1595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Hussain, A.; Khan, M.I.; Albaqami, M.; Mahpara, S.; Noorka, I.R.; Ahmed, M.A.A.; Aljuaid, B.S.; El-Shehawi, A.M.; Liu, Z.; Farooq, S.; et al. CaWRKY30 Positively Regulates Pepper Immunity by Targeting CaWRKY40 against Ralstonia solanacearum Inoculation through Modulating Defense-Related Genes. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 12091. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Yang, S.; Zhang, Y.; Cai, W.; Liu, C.; Hu, J.; Shen, L.; Huang, X.; Guan, D.; He, S. CaWRKY28 Cys249 is required for interaction with CaWRKY40 in the regulation of pepper immunity to Ralstonia solanacearum. Mol. Plant. Microbe Interact. 2021, 34, 733–745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Wang, Y.; Dang, F.; Liu, Z.; Wang, X.; Eulgem, T.; Lai, Y.; Yu, L.; She, J.; Shi, Y.; Lin, J.; et al. CaWRKY58, encoding a group I WRKY transcription factor of Capsicum annuum, negatively regulates resistance to Ralstonia solanacearum infection. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2013, 14, 131–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Ifnan Khan, M.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, Z.; Hu, J.; Liu, C.; Yang, S.; Hussain, A.; Furqan Ashraf, M.; Noman, A.; Shen, L. CaWRKY40b in pepper acts as a negative regulator in response to Ralstonia solanacearum by directly modulating defense genes including CaWRKY40. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2018, 19, 1403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Zheng, J.; Liu, F.; Zhu, C.; Li, X.; Dai, X.; Yang, B.; Zou, X.; Ma, Y. Identification, expression, alternative splicing and functional analysis of pepper WRKY gene family in response to biotic and abiotic stresses. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0219775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Chen, S.; Ding, Y.; Tian, H.; Wang, S.; Zhang, Y. WRKY54 and WRKY70 positively regulate SARD1 and CBP60g expression in plant immunity. Plant Signal. Behav. 2021, 16, 1932142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Besseau, S.; Li, J.; Palva, E.T. WRKY54 and WRKY70 co-operate as negative regulators of leaf senescence in Arabidopsis thaliana. J. Exp. Bot. 2012, 63, 2667–2679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Jiang, J.; Xi, H.; Dai, Z.; Lecourieux, F.; Yuan, L.; Liu, X.; Patra, B.; Wei, Y.; Li, S.; Wang, L. VvWRKY8 represses stilbene synthase genes through direct interaction with VvMYB14 to control resveratrol biosynthesis in grapevine. J. Exp. Bot. 2019, 70, 715–729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Cai, R.; Dai, W.; Zhang, C.; Wang, Y.; Wu, M.; Zhao, Y.; Ma, Q.; Xiang, Y.; Cheng, B. The maize WRKY transcription factor ZmWRKY17 negatively regulates salt stress tolerance in transgenic Arabidopsis plants. Planta 2017, 246, 1215–1231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Zhou, Q.Y.; Tian, A.G.; Zou, H.F.; Xie, Z.M.; Lei, G.; Huang, J.; Wang, C.M.; Wang, H.W.; Zhang, J.S.; Chen, S.Y. Soybean WRKY-type transcription factor genes, GmWRKY13, GmWRKY21, and GmWRKY54, confer differential tolerance to abiotic stresses in transgenic Arabidopsis plants. Plant Biotechnol. J. 2008, 6, 486–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Sun, J.; Hu, W.; Zhou, R.; Wang, L.; Wang, X.; Wang, Q.; Feng, Z.; Li, Y.; Qiu, D.; He, G.; et al. The Brachypodium distachyon BdWRKY36 gene confers tolerance to drought stress in transgenic tobacco plants. Plant Cell Rep. 2015, 34, 23–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Jiao, S.Z.; Guo, C.; Yao, W.K.; Zhang, N.B.; Zhang, J.Y.; Xu, W.R. An Amur grape VaHsfC1 is involved in multiple abiotic stresses. Sci. Hortic. 2022, 295, 110785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Dumanovic, J.; Nepovimova, E.; Natic, M.; Kuca, K.; Jacevic, V. The significance of reactive oxygen species and antioxidant defense system in plants: A concise overview. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 552969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Zhang, H.X.; Feng, X.H.; Ali, M.; Jin, J.H.; Wei, A.M.; Khattak, A.M.; Gong, Z.H. Identification of pepper CaSBP08 gene in defense response against Phytophthora capsici infection. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Ma, X.; Gai, W.X.; Li, Y.; Yu, Y.N.; Ali, M.; Gong, Z.H. The CBL-interacting protein kinase CaCIPK13 positively regulates defence mechanisms against cold stress in pepper. J. Exp. Bot. 2022, 73, 1655–1667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Ma, X.; Li, Y.; Gai, W.X.; Li, C.; Gong, Z.H. The CaCIPK3 gene positively regulates drought tolerance in pepper. Hortic. Res. 2021, 8, 216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Loake, G.; Grant, M. Salicylic acid in plant defence—The players and protagonists. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2007, 10, 466–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Zhang, H.X.; Feng, X.H.; Jin, J.H.; Khan, A.; Guo, W.L.; Du, X.H.; Gong, Z.H. CaSBP11 Participates in the Defense Response of Pepper to Phytophthora capsici through Regulating the Expression of Defense-Related Genes. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 9065. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  44. Zhang, H.X.; Ali, M.; Feng, X.H.; Jin, J.H.; Huang, L.J.; Khan, A.; Lv, J.G.; Gao, S.Y.; Luo, D.X.; Gong, Z.H. A Novel Transcription Factor CaSBP12 Gene Negatively Regulates the Defense Response against Phytophthora capsici in Pepper (Capsicum annuum L.). Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2018, 20, 48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Zhu, Y.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, Q.; Chai, S.; Yin, W.; Gao, M.; Li, Z.; Wang, X. The transcription factors VaERF16 and VaMYB306 interact to enhance resistance of grapevine to Botrytis cinerea infection. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2022, 23, 1415–1432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Zhao, J.; Sun, Y.; Li, X.; Li, Y. CYSTEINE-RICH RECEPTOR-LIKE KINASE5 (CRK5) and CRK22 regulate the response to Verticillium dahliae toxins. Plant Physiol. 2022, 190, 714–731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Zhou, M.; Lu, Y.; Bethke, G.; Harrison, B.T.; Hatsugai, N.; Katagiri, F.; Glazebrook, J. WRKY70 prevents axenic activation of plant immunity by direct repression of SARD1. New Phytol. 2018, 217, 700–712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Li, Q.; Wang, J.; Bai, T.; Zhang, M.; Jia, Y.L.; Shen, D.Y.; Zhang, M.X.; Dou, D.L. A Phytophthora capsici effector suppresses plant immunity via interaction with EDS1. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2020, 21, 502–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Tang, H.; Bi, H.; Liu, B.; Lou, S.; Song, Y.; Tong, S.; Chen, N.; Jiang, Y.; Liu, J.; Liu, H. WRKY33 interacts with WRKY12 protein to up-regulate RAP2.2 during submergence induced hypoxia response in Arabidopsis thaliana. New Phytol. 2021, 229, 106–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Zhou, R.; Dong, Y.; Liu, X.; Feng, S.; Wang, C.; Ma, X.; Liu, J.; Liang, Q.; Bao, Y.; Xu, S.; et al. JrWRKY21 interacts with JrPTI5L to activate the expression of JrPR5L for resistance to Colletotrichum gloeosporioides in walnut. Plant J. 2022, 111, 1152–1166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Huang, H.; Zhao, W.; Li, C.; Qiao, H.; Song, S.; Yang, R.; Sun, L.; Ma, J.; Ma, X.; Wang, S. SlVQ15 interacts with jasmonate-ZIM domain proteins and SlWRKY31 to regulate defense response in tomato. Plant Physiol. 2022, 190, 828–842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Marino, D.; Froidure, S.; Canonne, J.; Ben Khaled, S.; Khafif, M.; Pouzet, C.; Jauneau, A.; Roby, D.; Rivas, S. Arabidopsis ubiquitin ligase MIEL1 mediates degradation of the transcription factor MYB30 weakening plant defence. Nat. Commun. 2013, 4, 1476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Li, Y.; Ma, X.; Gai, W.; Xiao, L.; Gong, Z. First Report of Colletotrichum gloeosporioides Causing Anthracnose on Pepper in Shaanxi Province, China. Plant Dis. 2021, 105, 2242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  54. Sun, C.Y.; Mao, S.L.; Zhang, Z.H.; Palloix, A.; Wang, L.H.; Zhang, B.X. Resistances to anthracnose (Colletotrichum acutatum) of Capsicum mature green and ripe fruit are controlled by a major dominant cluster of QTLs on chromosome P5. Sci. Hortic. 2015, 181, 81–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Zou, J.; Li, N.; Hu, N.; Tang, N.; Cao, H.; Liu, Y.; Chen, J.; Jian, W.; Gao, Y.; Yang, J.; et al. Co-silencing of ABA receptors (SlRCAR) reveals interactions between ABA and ethylene signaling during tomato fruit ripening. Hortic. Res. 2022, 9, uhac057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Tian, S.L.; Li, L.; Chai, W.G.; Shah, S.N.; Gong, Z.H. Effects of silencing key genes in the capsanthin biosynthetic pathway on fruit color of detached pepper fruits. BMC Plant Biol. 2014, 14, 314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Wang, W.; Li, T.; Chen, Q.; Deng, B.; Deng, L.; Zeng, K. Transcription factor CsWRKY65 participates in the establishment of disease resistance of citrus fruits to Penicillium digitatum. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2021, 69, 5671–5682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Sun, H.J.; Uchii, S.; Watanabe, S.; Ezura, H. A highly efficient transformation protocol for Micro-Tom, a model cultivar for tomato functional genomics. Plant Cell Physiol. 2006, 47, 426–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. Chen, H.; Zou, Y.; Shang, Y.; Lin, H.; Wang, Y.; Cai, R.; Tang, X.; Zhou, J.M. Firefly luciferase complementation imaging assay for protein-protein interactions in plants. Plant Physiol. 2008, 146, 368–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Walter, M.; Chaban, C.; Schutze, K.; Batistic, O.; Weckermann, K.; Nake, C.; Blazevic, D.; Grefen, C.; Schumacher, K.; Oecking, C.; et al. Visualization of protein interactions in living plant cells using bimolecular fluorescence complementation. Plant J. 2004, 40, 428–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Wang, L.; Tang, W.; Hu, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Sun, J.; Guo, X.; Lu, H.; Yang, Y.; Fang, C.; Niu, X.; et al. A MYB/bHLH complex regulates tissue-specific anthocyanin biosynthesis in the inner pericarp of red-centered kiwifruit Actinidia chinensis cv. Hongyang. Plant J. 2019, 99, 359–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Plants 12 01962 g001 550
Figure 1. Characterization of CaWRKY50. (a) Relative transcript levels of CaWRKY50 under C. scovillei inoculation in cv. R25 pepper fruits. (b) The phylogenetic tree of CaWRKY50 and other related WRKY proteins. The black asterisk indicates CaWRKY50. (c) Multiple sequence alignment of CaWRKY50 and homologous WRKY proteins. In (b,c), the sequences are from the following proteins: NtWRKY70 (Nicotiana tabacum, XP_016492893.1), SlWRKY81 (Solanum lycopersicum, NP_001266272.1), StWRKY6 (Solanum tuberosum, NP_001275414.1), CsWRKY70 (Citrus sinensis, KAH9673391.1), VvWRKY70 (Vitis vinifera, XP_002275401.1), AtWRKY54 (Arabidopsis thaliana, AT2G40750.1), OsWRKY41 (Oryza sativa, XP_015638413.1), and TaWRKY19 (Triticum aestivum, XP_04438106). (d) Expression analysis of CaWRKY50 in response to 5 mM SA and 100 μM JA treatment. (e) Transcript analysis of CaWRKY50 following C. scovillei inoculation after exogenous 5 mM SA treatment in pepper fruits. CaUBI3 (AY486137) was used as the internal control. Data are shown as means (±SD) from three biological replicates. Significant differences are shown by asterisks (* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, Student’s t test). (f) Localization of the CaWRKY50 protein in N. benthamiana epidermal cells (Scale bar = 50 μm). The 35S:GFP protein is used as a control. (g) Transcriptional activation of CaWRKY50 in the yeast. The positive control is pGBKT7-53 and pGADT7-T, and the negative control is pGBKT7-Lam and pGADT7-T.
Figure 1. Characterization of CaWRKY50. (a) Relative transcript levels of CaWRKY50 under C. scovillei inoculation in cv. R25 pepper fruits. (b) The phylogenetic tree of CaWRKY50 and other related WRKY proteins. The black asterisk indicates CaWRKY50. (c) Multiple sequence alignment of CaWRKY50 and homologous WRKY proteins. In (b,c), the sequences are from the following proteins: NtWRKY70 (Nicotiana tabacum, XP_016492893.1), SlWRKY81 (Solanum lycopersicum, NP_001266272.1), StWRKY6 (Solanum tuberosum, NP_001275414.1), CsWRKY70 (Citrus sinensis, KAH9673391.1), VvWRKY70 (Vitis vinifera, XP_002275401.1), AtWRKY54 (Arabidopsis thaliana, AT2G40750.1), OsWRKY41 (Oryza sativa, XP_015638413.1), and TaWRKY19 (Triticum aestivum, XP_04438106). (d) Expression analysis of CaWRKY50 in response to 5 mM SA and 100 μM JA treatment. (e) Transcript analysis of CaWRKY50 following C. scovillei inoculation after exogenous 5 mM SA treatment in pepper fruits. CaUBI3 (AY486137) was used as the internal control. Data are shown as means (±SD) from three biological replicates. Significant differences are shown by asterisks (* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, Student’s t test). (f) Localization of the CaWRKY50 protein in N. benthamiana epidermal cells (Scale bar = 50 μm). The 35S:GFP protein is used as a control. (g) Transcriptional activation of CaWRKY50 in the yeast. The positive control is pGBKT7-53 and pGADT7-T, and the negative control is pGBKT7-Lam and pGADT7-T.
Plants 12 01962 g001
Plants 12 01962 g002 550
Figure 2. Phenotypic and physiological index analysis of CaWRKY50-silenced pepper fruits. (a) The silencing efficiency of CaWRKY50 in pepper fruits was detected by qRT-PCR at 15 days post-infiltration. (b) The disease symptoms of CaWRKY50-silenced fruits infected with C. scovillei at 7 dpi (bar = 20 mm). The lesion regions are denoted by the yellow dotted line. (c) Lesion diameters were measured at 7 dpi. (d) MDA content. (e) H2O2 content. (f) CAT activity. (g) POD activity. (h) SOD activity. CaUBI3 (AY486137) was used as the internal control. Data are shown as means (±SD) from three biological replicates. Significant differences are shown by asterisks (* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, Student’s t test).
Figure 2. Phenotypic and physiological index analysis of CaWRKY50-silenced pepper fruits. (a) The silencing efficiency of CaWRKY50 in pepper fruits was detected by qRT-PCR at 15 days post-infiltration. (b) The disease symptoms of CaWRKY50-silenced fruits infected with C. scovillei at 7 dpi (bar = 20 mm). The lesion regions are denoted by the yellow dotted line. (c) Lesion diameters were measured at 7 dpi. (d) MDA content. (e) H2O2 content. (f) CAT activity. (g) POD activity. (h) SOD activity. CaUBI3 (AY486137) was used as the internal control. Data are shown as means (±SD) from three biological replicates. Significant differences are shown by asterisks (* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, Student’s t test).
Plants 12 01962 g002
Plants 12 01962 g003 550
Figure 3. Expression profiles of defense-related genes in CaWRKY50-silenced fruits. (a) The expression level of CaWRKY50 in CaWRKY50-silenced and control fruits after C. scovillei infection. (b–e) The transcript patterns of CaPR1, CaPR10, CaSAR8.2, and CaPO1 (SA-related genes) in control and CaWRKY50-silenced fruits under C. scovillei infection. (f–h) The transcript patterns of CaCAT, CaPOD, and CaSOD (ROS-related genes) in controls and CaWRKY50-silenced fruits under C. scovillei infection. CaUBI3 (AY486137) is used as the internal control. Data are shown as means (±SD) from three biological replicates. Significant differences are shown by asterisks (** p < 0.01, Student’s t test).
Figure 3. Expression profiles of defense-related genes in CaWRKY50-silenced fruits. (a) The expression level of CaWRKY50 in CaWRKY50-silenced and control fruits after C. scovillei infection. (b–e) The transcript patterns of CaPR1, CaPR10, CaSAR8.2, and CaPO1 (SA-related genes) in control and CaWRKY50-silenced fruits under C. scovillei infection. (f–h) The transcript patterns of CaCAT, CaPOD, and CaSOD (ROS-related genes) in controls and CaWRKY50-silenced fruits under C. scovillei infection. CaUBI3 (AY486137) is used as the internal control. Data are shown as means (±SD) from three biological replicates. Significant differences are shown by asterisks (** p < 0.01, Student’s t test).
Plants 12 01962 g003
Plants 12 01962 g004 550
Figure 4. Phenotypic and physiological index analysis of CaWRKY50 transient overexpression in pepper fruits. (a) The success of transient overexpression of CaWRKY50 in pepper fruits was detected by qRT-PCR at 3 days post-infiltration. (b) The disease symptoms of CaWRKY50 transient overexpression fruits infected with C. scovillei at 7 dpi (bar = 20 mm). The lesion regions are denoted by the yellow dotted line. (c) Lesion diameters were measured at 7 dpi. (d) MDA content. (e) H2O2 content. (f) CAT activity. (g) POD activity. (h) SOD activity. CaUBI3 (AY486137) was used as the internal control. Data are shown as means (±SD) from three biological replicates. Significant differences are shown by asterisks (** p < 0.01, Student’s t test).
Figure 4. Phenotypic and physiological index analysis of CaWRKY50 transient overexpression in pepper fruits. (a) The success of transient overexpression of CaWRKY50 in pepper fruits was detected by qRT-PCR at 3 days post-infiltration. (b) The disease symptoms of CaWRKY50 transient overexpression fruits infected with C. scovillei at 7 dpi (bar = 20 mm). The lesion regions are denoted by the yellow dotted line. (c) Lesion diameters were measured at 7 dpi. (d) MDA content. (e) H2O2 content. (f) CAT activity. (g) POD activity. (h) SOD activity. CaUBI3 (AY486137) was used as the internal control. Data are shown as means (±SD) from three biological replicates. Significant differences are shown by asterisks (** p < 0.01, Student’s t test).
Plants 12 01962 g004
Plants 12 01962 g005 550
Figure 5. Expression profiles of defense-related genes in CaWRKY50 transient overexpression. (a) The expression level of CaWRKY50 in transient overexpression and control fruits after C. scovillei infection. (b–e) The transcript patterns of CaPR1, CaPR10, CaSAR8.2, and CaPO1 (SA-related genes) in control and CaWRKY50 transient overexpression fruits under C. scovillei infection. (f–h) The transcript patterns of CaCAT, CaPOD, and CaSOD (ROS-related genes) in the control and CaWRKY50 transient overexpression fruits under C. scovillei infection. CaUBI3 (AY486137) is used as the internal control. Data are shown as means (±SD) from three biological replicates. Significant differences are shown by asterisks (** p < 0.01, Student’s t test).
Figure 5. Expression profiles of defense-related genes in CaWRKY50 transient overexpression. (a) The expression level of CaWRKY50 in transient overexpression and control fruits after C. scovillei infection. (b–e) The transcript patterns of CaPR1, CaPR10, CaSAR8.2, and CaPO1 (SA-related genes) in control and CaWRKY50 transient overexpression fruits under C. scovillei infection. (f–h) The transcript patterns of CaCAT, CaPOD, and CaSOD (ROS-related genes) in the control and CaWRKY50 transient overexpression fruits under C. scovillei infection. CaUBI3 (AY486137) is used as the internal control. Data are shown as means (±SD) from three biological replicates. Significant differences are shown by asterisks (** p < 0.01, Student’s t test).
Plants 12 01962 g005
Plants 12 01962 g006 550
Figure 6. Heterologous overexpression of CaWRKY50 in tomatoes. (a) qRT-PCR analysis of CaWRKY50 in transgenic tomatoes. (b) The symptoms of CaWRKY50 transgenic lines and control fruits infected with C. scovillei at 3 days post-inoculation (dpi) (bar = 10 mm). (c) The lesion diameter of CaWRKY50 transgenic lines and control fruits were measured at 3 dpi. (d) MDA content. (e) H2O2 content. (f) CAT activity. (g) POD activity. (h) SOD activity. (i–k) qRT-PCR analysis of SA-related defense genes (SlPR1, SlNPR1, and SlSABP2) in OE and control fruits at 0 and 3 dpi. (l–n) qRT-PCR analysis of ROS-related genes (SlPOD, SlAPX2, and SlCAT) at 0 and 3 dpi. SlACTIN (NM_001308447.1) was used as the internal control. Data are shown as means (±SD) from three biological replicates. Significant differences are shown by asterisks (* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, Student’s t test).
Figure 6. Heterologous overexpression of CaWRKY50 in tomatoes. (a) qRT-PCR analysis of CaWRKY50 in transgenic tomatoes. (b) The symptoms of CaWRKY50 transgenic lines and control fruits infected with C. scovillei at 3 days post-inoculation (dpi) (bar = 10 mm). (c) The lesion diameter of CaWRKY50 transgenic lines and control fruits were measured at 3 dpi. (d) MDA content. (e) H2O2 content. (f) CAT activity. (g) POD activity. (h) SOD activity. (i–k) qRT-PCR analysis of SA-related defense genes (SlPR1, SlNPR1, and SlSABP2) in OE and control fruits at 0 and 3 dpi. (l–n) qRT-PCR analysis of ROS-related genes (SlPOD, SlAPX2, and SlCAT) at 0 and 3 dpi. SlACTIN (NM_001308447.1) was used as the internal control. Data are shown as means (±SD) from three biological replicates. Significant differences are shown by asterisks (* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, Student’s t test).
Plants 12 01962 g006
Plants 12 01962 g007 550
Figure 7. CaWRKY50 directly binds to CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1 promoters and negatively regulates their transcriptional activity. (a) Yeast one-hybrid (Y1H) analysis of CaWRKY50 directly binds to the promoter of CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1. The transformed yeast cells were screened on SD/-Leu medium with 150 and 250 ng mL−1 AbA. The positive control is the co-transformation of pGADT7 and pAbAi-p53, and the negative control is the co-transformation of pGADT7 and pAbAi-bait. (b,c) GUS analysis of the influence of CaWRKY50 on the activity of the proCaEDS1/proCaSAMT1. (b) Histochemical GUS staining. (c) Quantification of GUS activity. (d,e) The effect of CaWRKY50 on the activity of the CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1 promoters by dual-luciferase assay in tobacco (Nicotiana benthamiana) leaves. The LUC to REN ratio was assessed as transcriptional activity. The empty vector 62-SK was used as a control. Data are shown as means (±SD) from three biological replicates. Significant differences are shown by asterisks (* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, Student’s t test).
Figure 7. CaWRKY50 directly binds to CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1 promoters and negatively regulates their transcriptional activity. (a) Yeast one-hybrid (Y1H) analysis of CaWRKY50 directly binds to the promoter of CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1. The transformed yeast cells were screened on SD/-Leu medium with 150 and 250 ng mL−1 AbA. The positive control is the co-transformation of pGADT7 and pAbAi-p53, and the negative control is the co-transformation of pGADT7 and pAbAi-bait. (b,c) GUS analysis of the influence of CaWRKY50 on the activity of the proCaEDS1/proCaSAMT1. (b) Histochemical GUS staining. (c) Quantification of GUS activity. (d,e) The effect of CaWRKY50 on the activity of the CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1 promoters by dual-luciferase assay in tobacco (Nicotiana benthamiana) leaves. The LUC to REN ratio was assessed as transcriptional activity. The empty vector 62-SK was used as a control. Data are shown as means (±SD) from three biological replicates. Significant differences are shown by asterisks (* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, Student’s t test).
Plants 12 01962 g007
Plants 12 01962 g008 550
Figure 8. The interaction of CaWRKY50 and CaWRKY42/CaMIEL1. (a) Yeast two-hybrid (Y2H) assay analysis of the interaction of CaWRKY50 and CaWRKY42/CaMIEL1. Different plasmid combinations were co-transformed into Y2H Gold. The positive controls are pGBKT7-53 and pGADT7-T, and the negative controls are pGBKT7-Lam and pGADT7-T. (b) Luciferase complementation imaging (LCI) assays. CaWRKY50-nLUC and CaWRKY42/CaMIEL1-cLUC were transiently co-expressed in tobacco leaves. Luciferase signals were imaged at 48 hpi. (c) Bimolecular fluorescence complementation (BiFC) assays. CaWRKY50-nYFP and CaWRKY42/CaMIEL1-cYFP were transiently co-expressed in tobacco leaves. YFP signals were observed at 48 hpi. Scale bars = 50 μm.
Figure 8. The interaction of CaWRKY50 and CaWRKY42/CaMIEL1. (a) Yeast two-hybrid (Y2H) assay analysis of the interaction of CaWRKY50 and CaWRKY42/CaMIEL1. Different plasmid combinations were co-transformed into Y2H Gold. The positive controls are pGBKT7-53 and pGADT7-T, and the negative controls are pGBKT7-Lam and pGADT7-T. (b) Luciferase complementation imaging (LCI) assays. CaWRKY50-nLUC and CaWRKY42/CaMIEL1-cLUC were transiently co-expressed in tobacco leaves. Luciferase signals were imaged at 48 hpi. (c) Bimolecular fluorescence complementation (BiFC) assays. CaWRKY50-nYFP and CaWRKY42/CaMIEL1-cYFP were transiently co-expressed in tobacco leaves. YFP signals were observed at 48 hpi. Scale bars = 50 μm.
Plants 12 01962 g008
Plants 12 01962 g009 550
Figure 9. A proposed model for CaWRKY50 in pepper under C. scovillei infection. CaWRKY50 was induced under exogenous SA and C. scovillei stress. CaWRKY50 serves as a negative regulator in response to C. scovillei by regulating SA and ROS signaling pathways. CaWRKY50 directly binds to CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1 promoters and suppresses their expression. CaWRKY50 interacts with CaWRKY42 and CaMIEL1. Arrows indicate positive regulation, while T-bars indicate negative regulation. A solid line shows direct regulation, and dotted lines show potential regulation.
Figure 9. A proposed model for CaWRKY50 in pepper under C. scovillei infection. CaWRKY50 was induced under exogenous SA and C. scovillei stress. CaWRKY50 serves as a negative regulator in response to C. scovillei by regulating SA and ROS signaling pathways. CaWRKY50 directly binds to CaEDS1 and CaSAMT1 promoters and suppresses their expression. CaWRKY50 interacts with CaWRKY42 and CaMIEL1. Arrows indicate positive regulation, while T-bars indicate negative regulation. A solid line shows direct regulation, and dotted lines show potential regulation.
Plants 12 01962 g009
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Li, Y.; Ma, X.; Xiao, L.-D.; Yu, Y.-N.; Yan, H.-L.; Gong, Z.-H. CaWRKY50 Acts as a Negative Regulator in Response to Colletotrichum scovillei Infection in Pepper. Plants 2023, 12, 1962. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12101962

AMA Style

Li Y, Ma X, Xiao L-D, Yu Y-N, Yan H-L, Gong Z-H. CaWRKY50 Acts as a Negative Regulator in Response to Colletotrichum scovillei Infection in Pepper. Plants. 2023; 12(10):1962. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12101962

Chicago/Turabian Style

Li, Yang, Xiao Ma, Luo-Dan Xiao, Ya-Nan Yu, Hui-Ling Yan, and Zhen-Hui Gong. 2023. "CaWRKY50 Acts as a Negative Regulator in Response to Colletotrichum scovillei Infection in Pepper" Plants 12, no. 10: 1962. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12101962

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