Identification of the CDPK Pan-Genomic Family in Pear (Pyrus spp.) and Analysis of Its Response to Venturia nashicola
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Plant Materials and Growth Conditions
2.2. Identification of the Pear PyCDPK Gene Family
2.3. Phylogenetic Analysis and Presence/Absence of PyCDPKs
2.4. Cis-Acting Element Analysis of PyCDPKs and Ka/Ks Calculation
2.5. RNA-Seq Data Analysis
2.6. Induction of Callus Formation and Transient Overexpression in Pear Callus
2.7. Measurement of Physiological Indicators
2.8. Data Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Identification of PyCDPK Pan-Gene Family Members
3.2. Physicochemical Properties of PyCDPKs
3.3. Colinearity Analysis of PyCDPKs
3.4. Selection Pressure Analysis of PyCDPKs
3.5. Cis-Acting Element Analysis of PyCDPKs
3.6. Phylogenetic Analysis of PyCDPKs
3.7. Response of PyCDPKs to V. nashicola
3.8. Transient Expression of PyCDPK19 in Tobacco
3.9. Transient Expression of PyCDPK19 in Pear Calli
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Liu, F.; Xi, M.; Liu, T.; Wu, X.; Ju, L.; Wang, D. The Central Role of Transcription Factors in Bridging Biotic and Abiotic Stress Responses for Plants’ Resilience. New Crops 2024, 1, 100005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Valmonte-Cortes, G.R.; Higgins, C.M.; MacDiarmid, R.M. Arabidopsis Calcium Dependent Protein Kinase 3, and Its Orthologues Oscpk1, Oscpk15, and Accpk16, Are Involved in Biotic and Abiotic Stresses. Plants 2025, 14, 294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, S.; Xie, Y.; Pan, S.; Yu, S.; Zhang, L. Identification of Perennial Ryegrass Cdpk Gene Family and Function Exploration of Lpcdpk27 Upon Salt Stress. Grass Res. 2025, 5, e009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.; Zhang, H.; Liang, S.; Chen, X.; Liu, J.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, A. Identification of Cdpk Gene Family in Solanum Habrochaites and Its Function Analysis under Stress. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 4227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xiong, Y.; Lin, D.; Ma, S.; Wang, C.; Lin, S. Genome-Wide Identification of the Calcium-Dependent Protein Kinase Gene Family in Fragaria Vesca and Expression Analysis under Different Biotic Stresses. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 2022, 164, 283–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, M.; Liu, Y.; He, Q.; Chai, M.; Huang, Y.; Chen, F.; Wang, X.; Liu, Y.; Cai, H.; Qin, Y. Genome-Wide Investigation of Calcium-Dependent Protein Kinase Gene Family in Pineapple: Evolution and Expression Profiles During Development and Stress. BMC Genom. 2020, 21, 72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kiselev, K.V.; Dubrovina, A.S. The Role of Calcium-Dependent Protein Kinase (Cdpk) Genes in Plant Stress Resistance and Secondary Metabolism Regulation. Plant Growth Regul. 2025, 105, 535–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, J.; Zhang, M.; Li, X.; Khan, A.; Kumar, S.; Allan, A.C.; Lin-Wang, K.; Espley, R.V.; Wang, C.; Wang, R. Pear Genetics: Recent Advances, New Prospects, and a Roadmap for the Future. Hortic. Res. 2022, 9, uhab040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaviani, B.; Barandan, A.; Tymoszuk, A.; Kulus, D. Optimization of in Vitro Propagation of Pear (Pyrus communis L.)‘Pyrodwarf®(S)’Rootstock. Agronomy 2023, 13, 268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, T.; Duan, S.; Xu, C.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, X.; Xu, X.; Chen, L.; Han, Z.; Wu, T. Pan-Genome Analysis of 13 Malus Accessions Reveals Structural and Sequence Variations Associated with Fruit Traits. Nat. Commun. 2023, 14, 7377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johnson, S.; Jones, D.; Thrimawithana, A.H.; Deng, C.H.; Bowen, J.K.; Mesarich, C.H.; Ishii, H.; Won, K.; Bus, V.G.; Plummer, K.M. Whole Genome Sequence Resource of the Asian Pear Scab Pathogen Venturia Nashicola. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact. 2019, 32, 1463–1467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.; Zheng, X.; Zhou, P.; Song, Y.; Li, L. Reactive Oxygen Species and Salicylic Acid Mediate the Responses of Pear to Venturia Nashicola Infection. Agronomy 2024, 14, 877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Won, K.; Choi, E.D.; Kim, K.; Jung, H.W.; Shin, I.S.; Hong, S.; Segonzac, C.; Kim, Y.J. An Alternative Method to Evaluate Resistance to Pear Scab (Venturia Nashicola). Plant Pathol. J. 2023, 39, 228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, M.; Zhang, M.; Kumar, S.; Qin, M.; Liu, Y.; Wang, R.; Qi, K.; Zhang, S.; Chang, W.; Li, J. Genomic Selection of Eight Fruit Traits in Pear. Hortic. Plant J. 2024, 10, 318–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, J.; Wang, Y.; Xu, J.; Korban, S.S.; Fei, Z.; Tao, S.; Ming, R.; Tai, S.; Khan, A.M.; Postman, J.D. Diversification and Independent Domestication of Asian and European Pears. Genome Biol. 2018, 19, 77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, J.; Wang, Z.; Shi, Z.; Zhang, S.; Ming, R.; Zhu, S.; Khan, M.A.; Tao, S.; Korban, S.S.; Wang, H. The Genome of the Pear (Pyrus bretschneideri Rehd.). Genome Res. 2013, 23, 396–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ou, C.; Wang, F.; Wang, J.; Li, S.; Zhang, Y.; Fang, M.; Ma, L.; Zhao, Y.; Jiang, S. A De Novo Genome Assembly of the Dwarfing Pear Rootstock Zhongai 1. Sci. Data 2019, 6, 281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dong, X.; Wang, Z.; Tian, L.; Zhang, Y.; Qi, D.; Huo, H.; Xu, J.; Li, Z.; Liao, R.; Shi, M. De Novo Assembly of a Wild Pear (Pyrus betuleafolia) Genome. Plant Biotechnol. J. 2020, 18, 581–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, S.; Li, J.; Li, N.; Zhou, P.; Li, L. Genome-Wide Identification of Calcium-Dependent Protein Kinases (Cdpks) in Pear (Pyrus Bretschneideri Rehd) and Characterization of Their Responses to Venturia Nashicola Infection. Hortic. Environ. Biotechnol. 2022, 63, 903–915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tao, Y.; Luo, H.; Xu, J.; Cruickshank, A.; Zhao, X.; Teng, F.; Hathorn, A.; Wu, X.; Liu, Y.; Shatte, T. Extensive Variation within the Pan-Genome of Cultivated and Wild Sorghum. Nature Plants. 2021, 7, 766–773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, S.; Qian, Y.-Q.; Zhao, R.-P.; Chen, L.-L.; Song, J.-M. Graph-Based Pan-Genomes: Increased Opportunities in Plant Genomics. J. Exp. Bot. 2023, 74, 24–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Y.; Wang, Y.; Li, J.; Li, L. Responses of Intracellular Ca2+ and Its Sensors to Venturia Nashicola Infection in Pear (Pyrus bretschneideri) with Differing Resistance. Sci. Hortic. 2019, 243, 552–558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xie, M.; Huang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, X.; Yang, H.; Yu, O.; Dai, W.; Fang, C. Transcriptome Profiling of Fruit Development and Maturation in Chinese White Pear (Pyrus bretschneideri Rehd). BMC Genom. 2013, 14, 823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, T.; Huang, X.-S. Deep Sequencing-Based Characterization of Transcriptome of Pyrus Ussuriensis in Response to Cold Stress. Gene 2018, 661, 109–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xia, W.; Wang, S.; Liu, X.; Chen, Y.; Lin, C.; Liu, R.; Liu, H.; Li, J.; Zhu, J. Chromosome-Level Genome Provides New Insight into the Overwintering Process of Korla Pear (Pyrus sinkiangensis Yu). BMC Plant Biol. 2024, 24, 773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, Y.; Wang, H.; Shi, H. Genome-Wide Identification and Molecular Characterization of the Mapk Family Members in Sand Pear (Pyrus pyrifolia). BMC Genom. 2025, 26, 485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Linsmith, G.; Rombauts, S.; Montanari, S.; Deng, C.H.; Celton, J.-M.; Guérif, P.; Liu, C.; Lohaus, R.; Zurn, J.D.; Cestaro, A. Pseudo-Chromosome–Length Genome Assembly of a Double Haploid “Bartlett” Pear (Pyrus communis L.). Gigascience. 2019, 8, giz138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Letunic, I.; Khedkar, S.; Bork, P. Smart: Recent Updates, New Developments and Status in 2020. Nucleic Acids Res. 2021, 49, D458–D460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Price, M.N.; Dehal, P.S.; Arkin, A.P. Fasttree 2–Approximately Maximum-Likelihood Trees for Large Alignments. PLoS ONE 2010, 5, e9490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Letunic, I.; Bork, P. Interactive Tree of Life (Itol) V5: An Online Tool for Phylogenetic Tree Display and Annotation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2021, 49, W293–W296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gu, Z.; Eils, R.; Schlesner, M. Complex Heatmaps Reveal Patterns and Correlations in Multidimensional Genomic Data. Bioinformatics 2016, 32, 2847–2849. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, C.; Wu, Y.; Li, J.; Wang, X.; Zeng, Z.; Xu, J.; Liu, Y.; Feng, J.; Chen, H.; He, Y. Tbtools-Ii: A “One for All, All for One” Bioinformatics Platform for Biological Big-Data Mining. Mol. Plant 2023, 16, 1733–1742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, D.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Zhu, J.; Yu, J. Kaks_Calculator 2.0: A Toolkit Incorporating Gamma-Series Methods and Sliding Window Strategies. Genom. Proteom. Bioinform. 2010, 8, 77–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wilke, C.O.; Wilke, M.C.O. Package “Ggridges”. Ridgeline Plots in “ggplot2. 2022. Available online: https://wilkelab.org/ggridges/ (accessed on 5 May 2025).
- Wickham, H.; Chang, W.; Wickham, M.H. Package ‘Ggplot2’. Create Elegant Data Visualisations Using the Grammar of Graphics. 2016. Available online: https://ggplot2.tidyverse.org/reference/ggplot2-package.html (accessed on 5 May 2025).
- Chen, S.; Zhou, Y.; Chen, Y.; Gu, J. Fastp: An Ultra-Fast All-in-One Fastq Preprocessor. Bioinformatics 2018, 34, I884–I890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, D.; Paggi, J.M.; Park, C.; Bennett, C.; Salzberg, S.L. Graph-Based Genome Alignment and Genotyping with Hisat2 and Hisat-Genotype. Nat. Biotechnol. 2019, 37, 907–915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Putri, G.H.; Anders, S.; Pyl, P.T.; Pimanda, J.E.; Zanini, F. Analysing High-Throughput Sequencing Data in Python with Htseq 2.0. Bioinformatics 2022, 38, 2943–2945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maletich, G.; Gavrilenko, I.; Pushin, A.; Chelombit, S.; Khmelnitskaya, T.; Plugatar, Y.; Dolgov, S.; Khvatkov, P. Somatic Embryogenesis and Agrobacterium-Mediated Transformation in a Number of Grape Cultivars. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult. (PCTOC) 2025, 160, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Man, Q.-c.; Wang, Y.-Q.; Gao, S.-J.; Gao, Z.-C.; Peng, Z.-P.; Cui, J.-H. Pan-Genome Analysis and Expression Verification of the Maize Arf Gene Family. Front. Plant Sci. 2025, 15, 1506853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang Hui, D.B.; Li, Y.X.; Ren, Q.R.; Zhou, H.; Zhao, J.L.; Hu, H.F. Research Progress and Prospects on Crop Pan-Genomics. Sci. Agric. Sin. 2025, 58, 2045–2061. [Google Scholar]
- Dowling, C.A.; Michael, T.P.; McCabe, P.F.; Schilling, S.; Melzer, R. Ft-Like Genes in Cannabis and Hops: Sex Specific Expression and Copy-Number Variation May Explain Flowering Time Variation. bioRxiv 2024, 10.04.616617. [Google Scholar]
- Goher, F.; Khan, F.S.; Sun, S.; Wang, Q. Calcium-Dependent Protein Kinase (Cdpk/Cpk)-Mediated Salicylic Acid Cascade: The Key Arsenal of Plants under Pathogens Attack. Crit. Rev. Biotechnol. 2025, online ahead of print, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zia, K.; Rao, M.J.; Sadaqat, M.; Azeem, F.; Fatima, K.; Qamar, M.T.U.; Alshammari, A.; Alharbi, M. Pangenome-Wide Analysis of Cyclic Nucleotide-Gated Channel (Cngc) Gene Family in Citrus Spp. Revealed Their Intraspecies Diversity and Potential Roles in Abiotic Stress Tolerance. Front. Genet. 2022, 13, 1034921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zheng, X.; Cai, D.; Potter, D.; Postman, J.; Liu, J.; Teng, Y. Phylogeny and Evolutionary Histories of Pyrus L. Revealed by Phylogenetic Trees and Networks Based on Data from Multiple DNA Sequences. Mol. Phylogenetics Evol. 2014, 80, 54–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, S.; Zheng, X.; Yu, P.; Yue, X.; Ahmed, M.; Cai, D.; Teng, Y. Primitive Genepools of Asian Pears and Their Complex Hybrid Origins Inferred from Fluorescent Sequence-Specific Amplification Polymorphism (Ssap) Markers Based on Ltr Retrotransposons. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0149192. [Google Scholar]
- Yuanwen Teng, Y.; Tanabe, K.; Tamura, F.; Itai, A. Genetic Relationships of Pear Cultivars in Xinjiang, China, as Measured by Rapd Markers. J. Hortic. Sci. Biotechnol. 2001, 76, 771–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feng, Y.; Li, M.; Lu, S.; Shao, M.; Liang, G.; Mao, J. Identification of the Grape Mapkkk Gene Family and Functional Analysis of the Vamapkkk15 Gene under Low Temperature Stress. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2025, 220, 109533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, H.; Ji, X.; Wang, M.; Li, J.; Wang, X.; Meng, L.; Wei, P.; Xu, H.; Niu, T.; Liu, A. Genome-Wide Identification and Expression Analysis of the Dof Gene Family Reveals Their Involvement in Hormone Response and Abiotic Stresses in Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). Gene 2024, 910, 148336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, J.-W.; Li, J.-Y.; Yu, Z.-F.; Chang, X.-Y.; Han, J.-R.; Xia, J.-Y.; Kami, Y.B.; Sun, Y.-T.; Li, L.; Wang, S.-T. Comparative Genomic Analysis Reveals the Difference of Nlr Immune Receptors between Anthracnose-Resistant and Susceptible Sorghum Cultivars. Phytopathol. Res. 2025, 7, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gong, Z.; Xiong, L.; Shi, H.; Yang, S.; Herrera-Estrella, L.R.; Xu, G.; Chao, D.-Y.; Li, J.; Wang, P.-Y.; Qin, F. Plant Abiotic Stress Response and Nutrient Use Efficiency. Sci. China Life Sci. 2020, 63, 635–674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shen, L.; Yang, S.; Yang, T.; Liang, J.; Cheng, W.; Wen, J.; Liu, Y.; Li, J.; Shi, L.; Tang, Q. Cacdpk15 Positively Regulates Pepper Responses to Ralstonia Solanacearum Inoculation and Forms a Positive-Feedback Loop with Cawrky40 to Amplify Defense Signaling. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 22439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kobayashi, M.; Yoshioka, M.; Asai, S.; Nomura, H.; Kuchimura, K.; Mori, H.; Doke, N.; Yoshioka, H. Stcdpk5 Confers Resistance to Late Blight Pathogen but Increases Susceptibility to Early Blight Pathogen in Potato Via Reactive Oxygen Species Burst. New Phytol. 2012, 196, 223–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pan, G.; Zhang, H.; Chen, B.; Gao, S.; Yang, B.; Jiang, Y.-Q. Rapeseed Calcium-Dependent Protein Kinase Cpk6l Modulates Reactive Oxygen Species and Cell Death through Interacting and Phosphorylating Rbohd. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2019, 518, 719–725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]








| Gene Name | Protein Length (aa) | MW (kDa) | Hydropathicity | Instability Index | pI | Subcellular Localization |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PyCDPK1 | 556 | 63.26 | −0.628 | 39.12 | 9.18 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK2 | 577 | 64.25 | −0.373 | 45.15 | 5.33 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK3 | 654 | 73.12 | −0.137 | 42.71 | 5.38 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK4 | 526 | 58.71 | −0.264 | 42.51 | 5.84 | cytoplasmic |
| PyCDPK5 | 810 | 90.92 | −0.409 | 46.31 | 6.54 | nucleus |
| PyCDPK6 | 534 | 59.75 | −0.529 | 40.67 | 5.67 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK7 | 533 | 59.77 | −0.397 | 36.78 | 5.91 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK8 | 494 | 55.60 | −0.442 | 33.49 | 5.54 | cytoplasm, nucleus |
| PyCDPK9 | 527 | 59.37 | −0.417 | 38.76 | 6.03 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK10 | 500 | 56.04 | −0.316 | 35.81 | 5.48 | cytoplasmic |
| PyCDPK11 | 571 | 63.91 | −0.433 | 44.23 | 5.94 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK12 | 546 | 61.03 | −0.488 | 45.75 | 6.12 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK13 | 525 | 58.99 | −0.475 | 38.68 | 6.05 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK14 | 548 | 62.30 | −0.428 | 39.22 | 6.71 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK15 | 550 | 62.49 | −0.322 | 38.68 | 5.62 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK16 | 647 | 71.68 | −0.401 | 38.28 | 5.88 | cytoplasm, cell membrane |
| PyCDPK17 | 618 | 69.00 | −0.391 | 43.96 | 5.82 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK18 | 534 | 60.39 | −0.504 | 34.73 | 5.92 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK19 | 531 | 59.88 | −0.432 | 38.61 | 6.07 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK20 | 527 | 59.52 | −0.504 | 46.24 | 5.82 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK21 | 502 | 55.99 | −0.275 | 41.2 | 5.13 | cytoplasm, nucleus |
| PyCDPK22 | 502 | 55.93 | −0.276 | 41.35 | 5.09 | cytoplasm, nucleus |
| PyCDPK23 | 552 | 61.74 | −0.483 | 36.52 | 5.6 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK24 | 498 | 55.64 | −0.295 | 41.75 | 5.09 | cytoplasm, nucleus |
| PyCDPK25 | 498 | 55.63 | −0.294 | 40.87 | 5.09 | cytoplasm, nucleus |
| PyCDPK26 | 527 | 59.43 | −0.429 | 39.28 | 5.95 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK27 | 484 | 54.05 | −0.281 | 40.56 | 5.24 | cytoplasmic |
| PyCDPK28 | 498 | 55.63 | −0.294 | 40.87 | 5.09 | cytoplasm, nucleus |
| PyCDPK29 | 534 | 59.75 | −0.529 | 40.67 | 5.67 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK30 | 552 | 62.19 | −0.564 | 38.56 | 9.08 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK31 | 468 | 53.03 | −0.407 | 38.74 | 5.37 | cytoplasmic |
| PyCDPK32 | 525 | 58.94 | −0.46 | 37.09 | 6.02 | cytoplasm, cell membrane |
| PyCDPK33 | 552 | 62.19 | −0.564 | 38.56 | 9.08 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK34 | 556 | 63.25 | −0.628 | 39.12 | 9.18 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK35 | 652 | 71.14 | −0.318 | 44.25 | 5.37 | cytoplasm, nucleus |
| PyCDPK36 | 462 | 52.46 | −0.411 | 40.34 | 5.47 | cytoplasmic |
| PyCDPK37 | 544 | 61.06 | −0.521 | 42.07 | 6.35 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK38 | 527 | 59.46 | −0.431 | 40.52 | 5.99 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK39 | 474 | 53.11 | −0.327 | 40.78 | 5.18 | cytoplasmic |
| PyCDPK40 | 571 | 63.95 | −0.427 | 44.74 | 5.88 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK41 | 543 | 60.80 | −0.529 | 46.02 | 6.35 | cytoplasm, cell membrane |
| PyCDPK42 | 549 | 61.97 | −0.392 | 33.17 | 6.54 | cytoplasm, cell membrane |
| PyCDPK43 | 527 | 59.97 | −0.363 | 39.2 | 5.27 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK44 | 519 | 58.33 | −0.293 | 38.53 | 5.55 | cytoplasmic |
| PyCDPK45 | 480 | 54.00 | −0.242 | 42.68 | 5.23 | cytoplasmic |
| PyCDPK46 | 459 | 52.29 | −0.422 | 36.55 | 5.59 | cytoplasmic |
| PyCDPK47 | 527 | 59.41 | −0.51 | 46.08 | 5.85 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK48 | 552 | 62.19 | −0.564 | 38.56 | 9.08 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK49 | 502 | 55.93 | −0.276 | 41.67 | 5.13 | cytoplasm, nucleus |
| PyCDPK50 | 498 | 55.69 | −0.301 | 41.36 | 5.13 | cytoplasm, nucleus |
| PyCDPK51 | 582 | 65.17 | −0.56 | 38.11 | 5.7 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK52 | 525 | 58.94 | −0.46 | 37.09 | 6.02 | cytoplasm, cell membrane |
| PyCDPK53 | 552 | 62.19 | −0.564 | 38.56 | 9.08 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK54 | 527 | 59.44 | −0.428 | 38.96 | 5.95 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK55 | 538 | 21.80 | −0.433 | 48.58 | 6.49 | nucleus |
| PyCDPK56 | 498 | 55.69 | −0.301 | 41.36 | 5.13 | cytoplasm, nucleus |
| PyCDPK57 | 525 | 58.94 | −0.46 | 37.09 | 6.02 | cytoplasm, cell membrane |
| PyCDPK58 | 552 | 62.19 | −0.564 | 38.56 | 9.08 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK59 | 552 | 62.19 | −0.564 | 38.56 | 9.08 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK60 | 525 | 58.94 | −0.458 | 38.38 | 6.09 | cytoplasm, cell membrane |
| PyCDPK61 | 533 | 59.62 | −0.521 | 36.22 | 5.61 | cell membrane |
| PyCDPK62 | 535 | 60.18 | −0.454 | 37.09 | 5.98 | cytoplasm, cell membrane |
| PyCDPK63 | 498 | 55.58 | −0.283 | 40.7 | 5.12 | cytoplasmic |
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. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Hu, X.; Lian, Y.; Yang, Z.; Li, T.; Song, Y.; Li, L. Identification of the CDPK Pan-Genomic Family in Pear (Pyrus spp.) and Analysis of Its Response to Venturia nashicola. Horticulturae 2025, 11, 1181. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae11101181
Hu X, Lian Y, Yang Z, Li T, Song Y, Li L. Identification of the CDPK Pan-Genomic Family in Pear (Pyrus spp.) and Analysis of Its Response to Venturia nashicola. Horticulturae. 2025; 11(10):1181. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae11101181
Chicago/Turabian StyleHu, Xing, Yixuan Lian, Zhaoyun Yang, Tong Li, Yuqin Song, and Liulin Li. 2025. "Identification of the CDPK Pan-Genomic Family in Pear (Pyrus spp.) and Analysis of Its Response to Venturia nashicola" Horticulturae 11, no. 10: 1181. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae11101181
APA StyleHu, X., Lian, Y., Yang, Z., Li, T., Song, Y., & Li, L. (2025). Identification of the CDPK Pan-Genomic Family in Pear (Pyrus spp.) and Analysis of Its Response to Venturia nashicola. Horticulturae, 11(10), 1181. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae11101181
