Current issue
Online first
Archive
About the Journal
Editorial Office
Editorial Board
Publisher
Reviewers
Editorial policies
Ethical standards and procedures
Abstracting and indexing
Contact
Subscription
Instructions for authors
Article processing charge (APC)
English language editing services
Books and Events
Books
Events
RESEARCH PAPER
Comparative RNA sequencing analysis of resistant and susceptible Dendrobium “Earsakul” under black rot challenge
1
School of Crop Production Technology, Institute of Agricultural Technology, Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand
2
Department of Agricultural Management, Faculty of Interdisciplinary Management and Technology, Kasetsart University, Suphan Buri, Thailand
3
Department of Horticulture, Faculty of Agriculture, Ubon Ratchathani University, Ubon Ratchathani, Thailand
4
Center for Scientific and Technological Equipment, Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand
5
School of Biotechnology, Institute of Agricultural Technology, Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand
6
Agricultural Innovation and Management Division, Faculty of Natural Resources, Prince of Songkla University, Songkhla, Thailand
7
College of Landscape and Horticulture, Yunnan Agricultural University, Kunming, China
Submission date: 2025-07-07
Final revision date: 2025-12-12
Acceptance date: 2025-12-31
Publication date: 2026-03-25
Corresponding author
Piyada A. Tantasawat
School of Crop Production Technology, Suranaree University of Technology, 111 University Ave., Muang District, 30000, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand
School of Crop Production Technology, Suranaree University of Technology, 111 University Ave., Muang District, 30000, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand
KEYWORDS
Dendrobiumdefense response-related genesPhytophthora parasiticaresistance mechanismsRNA sequencingtranscriptomics analysis
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Background:
Dendrobium, a highly popular ornamental plant with immense economic significance, is increasingly threatened by black rot disease caused by Phytophthora parasitica. The sole reliance on the use of chemicals to control this disease highlights the need for developing strategies to generate sustainable, genetically resistant Dendrobium varieties.
Materials and methods:
In this study, we conducted comparative transcriptomic profiling to elucidate the molecular basis of black rot resistance in Dendrobium “Earsakul” by analyzing resistant (SUT13E18305) and susceptible (SUT16C007) lines at 0, 12, and 24 h post-inoculation.
Results:
Phenotypic evaluation revealed clear divergence between the two lines by 5 days after inoculation (DAI): the resistant line exhibited limited disease symptoms, while the susceptible line showed severe disease progression by 7 DAI. RNA sequencing analysis showed rapid and dynamic defense response in the resistant genotype, including activation of genes encoding pathogen recognition receptors such as chitin elicitor-binding protein-like and receptor-like kinases, which triggered the immune response. Key transcription factor genes (WRKY43, WRKY75, and MYB6) were strongly upregulated, and these upregulated genes mediated coordinated activation of signaling pathways. Defense-related genes involved in the biosynthesis of pathogenesis-related proteins and antimicrobial compounds, reactive oxygen species management, strengthening of the cell wall, and phenylpropanoid metabolism were also significantly induced in the resistant genotype. In contrast, the susceptible genotype exhibited delayed immune activation, suppressed expression of defense-related genes, and inadequate cell wall remodeling, ultimately leading to extensive colonization of the pathogen. Notably, quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction confirmed stage-specific expression patterns of multiple genes in both genotypes.
Conclusions:
The findings of this study demonstrate the utility of transcriptomics in elucidating complex defense responses in non-model crops and offer broader insights into plant-hemibiotrophic pathogen interactions, providing a molecular framework for breeding disease-resistant Dendrobium cultivars.
Dendrobium, a highly popular ornamental plant with immense economic significance, is increasingly threatened by black rot disease caused by Phytophthora parasitica. The sole reliance on the use of chemicals to control this disease highlights the need for developing strategies to generate sustainable, genetically resistant Dendrobium varieties.
Materials and methods:
In this study, we conducted comparative transcriptomic profiling to elucidate the molecular basis of black rot resistance in Dendrobium “Earsakul” by analyzing resistant (SUT13E18305) and susceptible (SUT16C007) lines at 0, 12, and 24 h post-inoculation.
Results:
Phenotypic evaluation revealed clear divergence between the two lines by 5 days after inoculation (DAI): the resistant line exhibited limited disease symptoms, while the susceptible line showed severe disease progression by 7 DAI. RNA sequencing analysis showed rapid and dynamic defense response in the resistant genotype, including activation of genes encoding pathogen recognition receptors such as chitin elicitor-binding protein-like and receptor-like kinases, which triggered the immune response. Key transcription factor genes (WRKY43, WRKY75, and MYB6) were strongly upregulated, and these upregulated genes mediated coordinated activation of signaling pathways. Defense-related genes involved in the biosynthesis of pathogenesis-related proteins and antimicrobial compounds, reactive oxygen species management, strengthening of the cell wall, and phenylpropanoid metabolism were also significantly induced in the resistant genotype. In contrast, the susceptible genotype exhibited delayed immune activation, suppressed expression of defense-related genes, and inadequate cell wall remodeling, ultimately leading to extensive colonization of the pathogen. Notably, quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction confirmed stage-specific expression patterns of multiple genes in both genotypes.
Conclusions:
The findings of this study demonstrate the utility of transcriptomics in elucidating complex defense responses in non-model crops and offer broader insights into plant-hemibiotrophic pathogen interactions, providing a molecular framework for breeding disease-resistant Dendrobium cultivars.
REFERENCES (68)
1.
Almagro L, Gómez-Vázquez R, Fernández-Pérez F, Bru R. 2009. Plant peroxidases in biotic and abiotic stress. Plant Physiol Biochem. 47: 543–551.
2.
Apel K, Hirt HH. 2004. Reactive oxygen species: metabolism, oxidative stress, and signal transduction. Ann Rev Plant Biol. 55: 373–399.
3.
Bag TK, Dutta P, Hubballi M, Kaur R, Mahanta M, Chakrabor-ty A, Das G, Kataky M, Waghunde R. 2024. Destructive Phytophthora on orchids: current knowledge and future perspectives. Front Microbiol. 14: 1139811. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.....
4.
Campa M, Piazza S, Righetti L, Oh CS, Conterno L, Borejsza-Wysocka E, Nagamangala KC, Beer SV, Aldwinckle HS, Malnoy M. 2019. HIPM is a susceptibility gene of Malus spp.: reduced expression reduces susceptibility to Erwinia amylovora. Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 32: 167–175.
5.
Constabel CP, Barbehenn RV. 2008. Plant polyphenol oxidases and their role in defense against herbivores. J Chem Ecol. 34: 841–849.
6.
Daly A, Conde B, Duff J. 2013. Orchid diseases in the Northern Territory. Agnote 568: 1–4.
7.
Ding LN, Li YT, Wu YZ, Li T, Geng R, Cao J, Zhang W, Tan XL. 2022. Plant disease resistance-related signaling pathways: recent progress and future prospects. Int J Mol Sci. 23: 16200. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms23....
9.
Duan Y, Duan S, Armstrong MR, Xu J, Zheng J, Hu J, Chen X, Hein I, Li G, Jin L. 2020. Comparative transcriptome profiling reveals compatible and incompatible patterns of potato toward Phytophthora infestans. G3 (Bethesda). 10: 623–634.
10.
Dubos C, Stracke R, Grotewold E, Weisshaar B, Martin C, Lepiniec ML. 2010. MYB transcription factors in plant responses to environmental cues. Trends Plant Sci. 15: 573–581.
11.
Eckardt NA. 2007. Positive and negative feedback coordinate regulation of disease resistance gene expression. Plant Cell. 19: 2700–2702.
12.
Fu ZQ, Dong X. 2013. Systemic acquired resistance: turning on immunity throughout the plant. Annu Rev Plant Biol. 64: 839–863.
13.
Grover A, Gowthaman R. 2009. Plant chitinases: a key for success in combating fungal pathogens. Crit Rev Biotechnol. 29: 220–229.
14.
Hahlbrock K, Scheel D. 1989. Physiology and molecular biology of phenylpropanoid metabolism. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol. 40: 347–369.
15.
Harris MA, Clark J, Ireland A, Lomax J, Ashburner M, Foulger R. 2004. The Gene Ontology (GO) database and informatics resource. Nucleic Acids Res. 32: 258–261.
16.
Jaree P, Boonchuen P, Thawonsuwan J, Kondo H, Hirono I, Somboonwiwat K. 2022. Transcriptome profiling reveals the novel immunometabolism-related genes against WSSV infection from Fenneropenaeus merguiensis. Fish Shellfish Immunol. 120: 31–44.
18.
Kaku H, Nishizawa Y, Ishii-Minami N, Akimoto-Tomiyama C, Dohmae N, Takio K, Minami E, Shibuya N. 2006. Plant cells recognize chitin fragments for defense signaling through a plasma membrane receptor. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 103: 11086–11091.
19.
Kanehisa M, Goto S. 2000. KEGG: kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes. Nucleic Acids Res. 28: 27–30.
20.
Keenan RJ, Walter P, Hegde RS. 2001. The signal recognition particle pathway. Annu Rev Biochem. 70: 755–775.
21.
Khairum A, Hualsawat S, Chueakhunthod W, Tharapreuksapong A, Tomsantia B, Yenchon S, Tantasawa PA. 2022. Selection and characterization of in vitro-induced mutants of Dendrobium ‘Earsakul’ resistant to black rot. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant. 58: 577–592.
22.
Khan GH, Shikari AB, Vaishnavi R, Najeeb S, Padder BA, Bhat ZA, Parray GA, Bhat MA, Kumar R, Singh NK. 2018. Marker-assisted introgression of three dominant blast resistance genes into an aromatic rice cultivar Mushk Budji. Sci Rep. 8: 4091. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598....
23.
Kim D, Langmead B, Salzberg SL. 2015. HISAT: a fast spliced aligner with low memory requirements. Nat Methods. 12: 357–360.
24.
Kukurba KR, Montgomery SB. 2015. RNA sequencing and analysis. Cold Spring Harb Protoc. 2015: 951–969.
25.
Lam E, Kato N, Lawton K. 2001. Programmed cell death, mitochondria and the plant hypersensitive response. Trends Cell Biol. 11: 405–411.
26.
Li Y, Zhang B, Wang Y, Gong X, Yu H. 2021. DOTFL1 affects the floral transition in orchid Dendrobium Chao Praya Smile. Plant Physiol. 186: 2021–2036.
27.
Li P, Liu D, Hu J, Yu B. 2023. RNA-seq analysis of soybean (Glycine max) responding to Phytophthora sojae. J Phytopathol. 171: 180–188.
28.
Liu L, Wang Y, Cui F, Fang A, Wang S, Wang J, Wei C, Li S, Sun W. 2017. The type III effector AvrXccB in Xanthomonas campestris pv. campestris targets putative methyltransferases and suppresses innate immunity in Arabidopsis. Mol Plant Pathol. 18: 768–782.
29.
van Loon LC, Rep A, Pieterse CMJ. 2006. The molecular biology of pathogenesis-related proteins. Annu Rev Phytopathol. 44: 135–162.
30.
Love MI, Huber W, Anders S. 2014. Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biol. 15: 550. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059....
31.
Ma A, Zhang D, Wang G, Wang K, Li Z, Gao Y, Li H, Bian C, Cheng J, Han Y, et al. 2021. Verticillium dahliae effector VDAL protects MYB6 from degradation by interacting with PUB25 and PUB26 E3 ligases to enhance Verticillium wilt resistance. Plant Cell 33: 3675–3699.
32.
Martin M. 2011. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMBnet J. 17: 10–12.
33.
Meng Y, Zhang Q, Ding W, Shana W. 2014. Phytophthora parasitica: a model oomycete plant pathogen. Mycology 5: 43–51.
34.
Meng H, Sun M, Jiang Z, Liu Y, Sun Y, Liu D, Jiang C, Ren M, Yuan G, Yu W, et al. 2021. Comparative transcriptome analysis reveals resistant and susceptible genes in tobacco cultivars in response to infection by Phytophthora nicotianae. Sci Rep. 11: 809. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598....
35.
Miao Y, Zentgraf U. 2007. The WRKY75 transcription factor is involved in plant senescence in Arabidopsis thaliana. J Exp Bot. 58: 4031–4038.
36.
Monaghan J, Zipfel C. 2012. Plant PRRs get in complex. Curr Opin Plant Biol. 15: 450–457.
37.
Morant M, SØrensen D, JØrgensen K, MØller BL. 2008. b-glucosidases as biocatalysts for the production of aglycones from plant glycosides. Phytochem Rev. 7: 167–176.
38.
Nawae W, Sangsrakru D, Yoocha T, Pinsupa S, Phetchawang P, Buaart S, Chusri O, Tangphatsornruang S, Pootakham W. 2024. Differences in transcriptomic responses upon Phytophthora palmivora infection among cultivars reveal potential underlying resistant mechanisms in durian. BMC Plant Biol. 24: 878. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12870....
39.
Nawrot R, Błaszczyk M. 2020. Chitinases: a diverse family of enzymes in plant defense. Biomolecules 10: 1386.
40.
Office of Agricultural Economics (OAE). 2025. Thai orchid export data. Available from: https://impexpth.oae.go.th/exp.... Accessed 10 March, 2025.
41.
Oh CS, Beer SV. 2007. AtHIPM, an ortholog of the apple HrpN-interacting protein, is a negative regulator of plant growth and mediates the growth-enhancing effect of HrpN in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol. 145: 426–436.
42.
Passardi F, Cosio C, Penel C, Dunand C. 2005. Peroxidases in plant development and defense. Plant Cell Rep. 24: 133–143.
43.
Peng Z, Hu Y, Zhang J, Huguet-Tapia JC, Block AK, Park S, Sapkota S, Liu Z, Liu S, White FF. 2019. Xanthomonas translucens commandeers the host rate-limiting step in ABA biosynthesis for disease susceptibility. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 116: 20938–20946.
44.
Phukan B, Jeena GS, Shukla RK. 2016. WRKY transcription factors: molecular regulation and stress responses in plants. Front Plant Sci. 7: 760. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2....
45.
Puchooa D. 2004. Comparison of different culture media for the in vitro culture of Dendrobium (Orchidaceae). Intl J Agr Biol. 6: 884–888.
46.
Reyes Zamora O, Troncoso-Rojas R, Báez-Flores ME, Tiznado-Hernández ME, Rascón-Chu A. 2024. Signaling of plant defense mediated by receptor-like kinases, receptor-like cytoplasmic protein kinases and MAPKs triggered by fungal chitin in horticultural crops. Hortic 10: 361.
47.
Rihouey C, Ganeva M, Michaud P. 2017. Plant pectinesterases: a review of their structure, function and implications in plant-pathogen interactions. Plant Sci. 262: 107–117.
48.
Ruan J, Zhou Y, Zhou M, Yan J, Khurshid M, Weng W, Cheng J, Zhang K. 2019. Jasmonic acid signaling pathway in plants. Int J Mol Sci. 20: 2479.
49.
Rushton PJ, Somssich IE, Ringler P, Shen QJ. 2010. WRKY transcription factors: key components in plant signaling networks. Trends Plant Sci. 15: 187–195.
50.
Segonzac C, Monaghan J. 2019. Modulation of plant innate immune signaling by small peptides. Curr Opin Plant Biol. 51: 22–28.
51.
Shibuya N, Minami E. 2001. Oligosaccharide elicitors and their receptors in plant defense reactions. Physiol Plant. 113: 329–335.
52.
Tang D, Christiansen KM, Innes RW. 2005. Regulation of plant defense responses in Arabidopsis by EDR2, a PH and START domain-containing protein. Plant J. 44: 245–257.
53.
Tantasawat PA, Khairum A, Arsakit K, Poolsawat O, Pornbungkerd P, Kativat C. 2015. Effects of different culture media on growth and proliferation of Dendrobium ‘Earsakul’ protocorm-like bodies. Horttechnology. 25: 681–686.
54.
Thipyapong P, Hunt MD, Steffens JC. 2004. Transgenic plants with suppressed expression of polyphenol oxidase show reduced resistance to insects. J Biol Chem. 279: 32410–32418.
56.
Uknes S, Dincher S, Friedrich L, Negrotto D, Williams S, Thompson-Taylor H, Potter S, Ward E, Ryals J. 1993. Regulation of pathogenesis-related protein-1a gene expression in tobacco. Plant Cell. 5: 159–169.
57.
Vacin EF, Went FW. 1949. Some pH changes in nutrient solution. Bot Gaz. 110: 605–613.
58.
Valliyodan B, Ye H, Song L, Murphy M, Shannon JG, Nguyen HT. 2017. Genetic diversity and genomic strategies for improving drought and waterlogging tolerance in soybeans. J Exp Bot. 68: 1835–1849.
59.
Vorwerk S, Schulze-Lefert P, Kusch K. 2007. EDR2 negatively regulates salicylic acid-based defenses and cell death during powdery mildew infections of Arabidopsis thaliana. BMC Plant Biol. 7: 35. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2....
60.
Wang Y, Li Y, Yan X, Ding L, Shen L, Yu H. 2020. Characterization of C-and D-class MADS-box genes in orchids. Plant Physiol. 184: 1469–1481.
61.
Wang P, Wu H, Zhao G, He Y, Kong W, Zhang J, Liu S, Liu M, Hu K, Liu L, et al. 2020. Transcriptome analysis clarified genes involved in resistance to Phytophthora capsici in melon. PLoS One 15: e0227284. https://doi.org/10.1371/journa....
62.
Wu L, Chen H, Curtis C, Fu ZQ. 2014. Go in for the kill: how plants deploy effector-triggered immunity to combat pathogens. [Corrected]. Virulence 5: 710–721.
63.
Xu M, Li H, Luo H, Liu J, Li K, Li Q, Yang N, Xu D. 2024. Unveiling the role of b-glucosidase genes in Bletilla striata’s secondary metabolism: a genome-wide analysis. Int J Mol Sci. 25: 13191. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms-2....
64.
Yao C, Wang Z, Li Y, Wu C, Li S, Song Y. 2012. RPN1a, a 26S proteasome subunit, is required for innate immunity in Arabidopsis. Plant J. 71: 779–791.
65.
Young MD, Wakefield MJ, Smyth GK, Oshlack A. 2010. Gene ontology analysis for RNA-seq: accounting for selection bias. Genome Biol. 11: R14. https://doi.org/10.1186/gb-201....
66.
Yu J, Chai C, Ai G, Jia Y, Liu W, Zhang X, Bai T, Dou D. 2020. A nicotiana benthamiana AP2/ERF transcription factor confers resistance to Phytophthora parasitica. Phytopathol Res. 2: 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42483....
67.
Zhang N, Zhou S, Yang D, Fan Z. 2020. Revealing shared and distinct genes responding to JA and SA signaling in Arabidopsis by meta-analysis. Front Plant Sci. 11: 908. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2....
68.
Zhou D, Chen X, Chen X, Xia Y, Liu J, Zhou G. 2023. Plant immune receptors interact with hemibiotrophic pathogens to activate plant immunity. Front Microbiol. 14: 1252039. 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1252039.
| eISSN: | 2353-9461 |
| ISSN: | 0860-7796 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
