Back

Differential genetic resistance identified in Parastagonospora nodorum and Pyrenophora tritici-repentis-wheat pathosystems

Phan, H. T. T.; Furuki, E.; Kamphuis, F.; Rybak, K.; Lenzo, L. V.; Cupitt, C. F.; Marathamuthu, K.; See, P. T.

2026-06-16 genetics
10.64898/2026.06.12.731808 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Septoria nodorum blotch (SNB) and tan spot (TS) wheat diseases are caused by necrotrophic fungal pathogens Parastagonospora nodorum (Pn) and Pyrenophora tritici-repentis (Ptr), respectively. Although recognised as premier model pathosystems for our understanding of necrotrophic effectors, no resistance mechanism has been reported in both diseases. Here, two SNB and TS resistance wheat lines ( 56:ZWB11 and 105:ZIF14) derived from the Australian national germplasm evaluation programme (CAIGE) were used to develop a double haploid mapping population. Two Pn and Ptr isolates of different pathotypes, their respective culture filtrates and effector SnTox267 were evaluated on the population. Genetic analysis of Ptr conidial inoculation of race 1 and race 2 identified a major resistance quantitative trait locus (QTL) (QTs.cur-1B) on chromosome 1B, while resistance to SNB was explained by several minor QTL. SnTox267 sensitivity was mapped to six locations (2A2, 2A3, 2B1, 2D3, 5B and 7B1) with only one QTL co-localized to known corresponding gene Snn7. Sensitivity loci 5B and 7B1 also conferred SNB resistance at seedling and adult stages. Two QTL on chromosome 2D1 and 7B2 were common in both SNB and TS, associated with disease at seedling stage and culture filtrate bioactivity, respectively. Resistance responses of 56:ZWB11 and 105:ZIF14 were confirmed cytologically, however, distinct responses were observed on wounded leaves. The defence responses were more effective against Ptr, while resistance to Pn infection was likely a combination of lack of susceptibility and effective physical barriers. Overall results demonstrated the distinction between the underlying resistance mechanisms to TS and SNB.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Plant Disease
23 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
26.5%
2
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 16%
11.9%
3
G3: Genes|Genomes|Genetics
35 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.9%
4
Frontiers in Plant Science
256 papers in training set
Top 1%
5.5%
50% of probability mass above
5
Pest Management Science
36 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.8%
6
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 26%
4.0%
7
Journal of Experimental Botany
219 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.0%
8
G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics
252 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.2%
9
Plant Pathology
18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.8%
10
Frontiers in Genetics
230 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
11
Phytopathology®
31 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
2.1%
12
Theoretical and Applied Genetics
49 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.9%
13
BMC Genomics
406 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.9%
14
BMC Plant Biology
57 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.7%
15
GENETICS
483 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
16
New Phytologist
346 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
17
The Plant Genome
57 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.0%
18
Frontiers in Microbiology
427 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.0%
19
PLOS Pathogens
820 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.8%
20
Molecular Plant Pathology
25 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
21
Agronomy
18 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
22
PLOS Genetics
862 papers in training set
Top 12%
0.8%
23
G3
33 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
24
Plant Biotechnology Journal
64 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
25
Journal of Fungi
32 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
26
Plants
43 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
27
Peer Community Journal
281 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.6%
28
Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions®
57 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
29
Horticulture Research
47 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%