It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi associate with the roots of many plant species, enhancing their hosts access to soil nutrients whilst obtaining their carbon supply directly as photosynthates. AM fungi often face competition for plant carbon from other organisms. The mechanisms by which plants prioritise carbon allocation to mutualistic AM fungi over parasitic symbionts remain poorly understood. Here, we show that host potato plants (Solanum tuberosum cv. Désirée) selectively allocate carbon resources to tissues interacting with AM fungi rather than those interacting with phytophagous parasites (the nematode Globodera pallida). We found that plants reduce the supply of hexoses but maintain the flow of plant-derived fatty acids to AM fungi when concurrently interacting with parasites. Transcriptomic analysis suggest that plants prioritise carbon transfer to AM fungi by maintaining expression of fatty acid biosynthesis and transportation pathways, whilst decreasing the expression of mycorrhizal-induced hexose transporters. We also report similar findings from a different plant host species (Medicago truncatula) and phytophagous pest (the aphid Myzus persicae). These findings suggest a general mechanism of plant-driven resource allocation in scenarios involving multiple symbionts.
Plant antagonists may disrupt the allocation of carbon resources from plants to mutualistic microorganisms. Here, the authors report how plants attacked by cyst nematodes and aphids maintain carbon transfer to arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi through fatty acid transfer whilst the limiting the loss of sugars.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details




1 University of Leeds, School of Biology, Faculty of Biological Sciences, Leeds, United Kingdom (GRID:grid.9909.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 8403)
2 University of Leeds, School of Biology, Faculty of Biological Sciences, Leeds, United Kingdom (GRID:grid.9909.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 8403); University of Sheffield, Plants, Photosynthesis and Soil, School of Biosciences, Sheffield, United Kingdom (GRID:grid.11835.3e) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 9262)
3 University of Leeds, School of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Faculty of Biological Sciences, Leeds, United Kingdom (GRID:grid.9909.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 8403)
4 University of Sheffield, Plants, Photosynthesis and Soil, School of Biosciences, Sheffield, United Kingdom (GRID:grid.11835.3e) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 9262)