The molecular mechanisms of HBV replication and the regulatory elements within the HBV genome have been extensively studied

June 19, 2017

ification as potential mechanism to prevent new fire blight infections in flowering orchards is discussed since a long time. Several commercially AZD-6482 available products are either based solely on this mode of action such as acidic stone meal or are formulated in acidic buffers including desinfectants or acid-tolerant antagonistic yeasts. Recently, natural acidification by the antagonist Pantoea agglomerans was suggested as potential additional antagonistic mechanism against E. amylovora. The common understanding how acidic pH prevents fire blight infections is mainly derived from the growth-inhibiting effect of pH,5 on E. amylovora thereby preventing multiplication on the flower, which is necessary to reach a critical cell density for infection. Also in our experiments E. amylovora did not grow below pH 5. The critical cell density necessary for infection is estimated in fire blight forecasting models to be at least 105106 colony-forming units per flower which is close to the naturally observed E. amylovora population densities of 106107 CFU per flower. Less is known how acidic pH affects the further development of infection when the critical cell density is reached. To investigate hrp gene expression at pH 4 and pH 7 without the effect of growth retardation by acidic pH, we applied E. amylovora inoculum densities above the threshold density necessary for infection. Interestingly, Wei et al. demonstrated that acidic pH 5.5 is inducing type III secretion in E. amylovora in liquid culture, which might hypothetically increase virulence and in consequence would be unwanted in fire blight control. Thus, we addressed the question if a more acidic pH 4 still increases expression of the type III secretion system during flower infection. On a molecular level, expression of hrp genes at acidic pH 4 was reduced without a typical peak expression curve as compared to bacterial suspension buffered to pH 7 on flowers. Therefore, in contrast to pH 5.5 the more acidic pH 4 does not induce hrp expression anymore. The non-inducing effect of pH 4 is meaningful considering the pH range naturally encountered by plant pathogenic bacteria during infection, which is usually between 5.06.5 in the PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22189214 apoplast. However, over time expression of hrp genes at acidic pH increased slowly and linearly but never reached peak expression levels observed at neutral pH. On some of the flowers, a minor expression peak for hrpN was observed indicating few successful infection events. Thus, under field conditions where flowering time may be prolonged compared to the greenhouse, the pathogen might still be able to infect albeit slower and at lower frequency. Interestingly, in flowers inoculated at acidic pH the plant defensive gene PR-1 was less suppressed at 24 hpi compared to neutral inoculations. Moreover, a clear upregulation of PR-1 at 48 hpi indicated that acidification disturbs the bacterial infection progress leading to activation of the plant defense. Regarding visible symptoms on inoculated blossoms, acidification of the bacterial suspension with pH 4 buffered water could reduce the number of flowers showing symptoms typically for fire blight. Together with our gene expression data, this indicates that acidification leads to slower and reduced infection rates and might well be an effective measure to reduce fire blight. In summary, a non-invasive inoculation technique allowed us to study the virulent behaviour of the E. amylovora pathogen on the flower and, in parallel, to ob