Insect Resistance Study for Transgenic Rice with Tomato Prosystemin Gene

WU Liang,BU Qing-yun,YANG Shi-hu,WAN Jian-min
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-7968.2007.01.014
2007-01-01
Abstract:Two binary vectors containing tomato(Lycopersicon psculentum) prosystemin gene pNAR304(UbiI5'+prosystemin+NOS3') and pNAR305 (UbiI5'+prosystemin+NOS3' + PinⅡ5'+PinⅡ+PinⅡ3' ) were constructed and were introduced into rice (Oryza sativa cvs. Xiushui 63, Hejiang19 and Nipponbare) by Agrobacterium-mediated transformation. From tests of hygromycin resistance, PCR and Southern blot, 14 independent transgenic plants were confirmed. Northern blotting analysis indicated that both presystemin gene and PinⅡ gene could transcribe in these transgenic plants. But in the rice insect resistance bioassays against striped stem borer (Chilo suppressalis Walker) and brown plant hopper (Nilaparvata luguns Stal), insect resistance of those plants transformed by prosystemin gene alone(pNAR304) showed no improvement than that of control plants and insect resistance of transgenic plants carrying both prosystemin gene and PinⅡ gene(pNAR305)exhibited significant increase than that of control plants, but their insect resistance level was similar to those transgenic plants only transferred a PinⅡ gene. This results indicated that tomato prosystemin gene transformed into rice could not regulate the expression of PinⅡ gene in transgenic rice. From above experiment results showed that there may be no signal pathway for tomato systemin in the rice and, probably, wounding signal transmission in rice is other pathway different from dicotyledonous systemin.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?