Unraveling the transcriptional features and gene expression networks of pathogenic and saprotrophic <i>Ophiostoma</i> species during the infection of <i>Ulmus americana</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT American elm ( Ulmus americana ), highly prized for its ornamental value, has suffered two successive outbreaks of Dutch elm disease (DED) caused by ascomycete fungi belonging to the genus Ophiostoma . To identify the genes linked to the pathogenicity of different species and lineages of Ophiostoma , we inoculated 2-year-old U. americana saplings with six strains representing three species of DED fungi, and one strain of the saprotroph Ophiostoma quercus . Differential expression analyses were performed following RNA sequencing of fungal transcripts recovered at 3- and 10-days post-infection. Based on a total of 8,640 Ophiostoma genes, we observed a difference in fungal gene expression depending on the strain inoculated and the time of incubation in host tissue. Some genes overexpressed in the more virulent strains of Ophiostoma encode hydrolases that possibly act synergistically. A mutant of Ophiostoma novo-ulmi in which the gene encoding the ogf1 transcription factor had been deleted did not produce transcripts for the gene encoding the hydrophobin cerato-ulmin and was less virulent. Weighted gene correlation network analyses identified several candidate pathogenicity genes distributed among 13 modules of interconnected genes. IMPORTANCE Ophiostoma is a genus of cosmopolitan fungi that belongs to the family Ophiostomataceae and includes the pathogens responsible for two devastating pandemics of Dutch elm disease (DED). As the mechanisms of action of DED agents remain unclear, we carried out the first comparative transcriptomic study including representative strains of the three Ophiostoma species causing DED, along with the phylogenetically close saprotrophic species Ophiostoma quercus . Statistical analyses of the fungal transcriptomes recovered at 3 and 10 days following infection of Ulmus americana saplings highlighted several candidate genes associated with virulence and host-pathogen interactions wherein each strain showed a distinct transcriptome. The results of this research underscore the importance of investigating the transcriptional behavior of different fungal taxa to understand their pathogenicity and virulence in relation to the timeline of infection.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".