AUTHOR=Pierron Romain J. G. , Pouzoulet Jérôme , Couderc Christel , Judic Elodie , Compant Stéphane , Jacques Alban 

TITLE=Variations in Early Response of Grapevine Wood Depending on Wound and Inoculation Combinations with Phaeoacremonium aleophilum and Phaeomoniella chlamydospora

JOURNAL=Frontiers in Plant Science

VOLUME=7

YEAR=2016

URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/plant-science/articles/10.3389/fpls.2016.00268

DOI=10.3389/fpls.2016.00268

ISSN=1664-462X

ABSTRACT=<p>Defense mechanisms in woody tissue are poorly understood, especially in vine colonized by trunk pathogens. However, several investigations suggest that molecular mechanisms in the central tissue of <italic>Vitis vinifera</italic> L. may be involved in trunk-defense reactions. In this work, the perception of <italic>Phaeoacremonium aleophilum</italic> and <italic>Phaeomoniella chlamydospora</italic> alone or together were investigated in cuttings of Cabernet Sauvignon trunks. Plant responses were analyzed at the tissue level via optical microscopy and at the cellular level via plant-gene expression. The microscopy results revealed that, 6 weeks after pathogen inoculation, newly formed vascular tissue is less developed in plants inoculated with <italic>P. chlamydospora</italic> than in plants inoculated with <italic>P. aleophilum</italic>. Co-inoculation with both pathogens resulted in an intermediate phenotype. Further analysis showed the relative expression of the following grapevine genes: <italic>PAL</italic>, <italic>PR10.3</italic>, <italic>TL</italic>, <italic>TLb</italic>, <italic>Vv17.3</italic>, <italic>STS</italic>, <italic>STS8</italic>, <italic>CWinv, PIN</italic>, <italic>CAM</italic>, <italic>LOX</italic> at 10, 24, 48, and 120 h post-inoculation (hpi). The gene set was induced by wounding before inoculation with the different pathogens, except for the genes <italic>CAM</italic> and <italic>LOX</italic>. This response generated significant noise, but the expression of the grapevine genes (<italic>PAL</italic>, <italic>PR10.3</italic>, <italic>TL</italic>, <italic>TLb</italic>, <italic>Vv17.3</italic>, <italic>STS</italic>, <italic>STS8</italic>, <italic>CWinv</italic>, and <italic>PIN</italic>) still differed due to perception of mycelium by the plant. Furthermore, at 48 hpi, the induction of <italic>PAL</italic> and <italic>STS8</italic> differs depending on the pathogen, and a specific pattern emerges from the different inductions associated with the different treatments. Based on these results, we conclude that <italic>V. vinifera</italic> L. trunk perceives the presence of pathogens differently depending on the inoculated pathogen or even on the combination of co-inoculated pathogens, suggesting a defense orchestration in the perennial organs of woody plants.</p>