Insights from the genome of the biotrophic fungal plant pathogen Ustilago maydis

Ustilago maydis is a ubiquitous pathogen of maize and a well-established model organism for the study of plant-microbe interactions. This basidiomycete fungus does not use aggressive virulence strategies to kill its host. U. maydis belongs to the group of biotrophic parasites (the smuts) that depend on living tissue for proliferation and development. Here we report the genome sequence for a member of this economically important group of biotrophic fungi. The 20.5-million-base U. maydis genome assembly contains 6,902 predicted protein-encoding genes and lacks pathogenicity signatures found in the genomes of aggressive pathogenic fungi, for example a battery of cell-wall-degrading enzymes. However, we detected unexpected genomic features responsible for the pathogenicity of this organism. Specifically, we found 12 clusters of genes encoding small secreted proteins with unknown function. A significant fraction of these genes exists in small gene families. Expression analysis showed that most of the genes contained in these clusters are regulated together and induced in infected tissue. Deletion of individual clusters altered the virulence of U. maydis in five cases, ranging from a complete lack of symptoms to hypervirulence. Despite years of research into the mechanism of pathogenicity in U. maydis, no 'true' virulence factors had been previously identified. Thus, the discovery of the secreted protein gene clusters and the functional demonstration of their decisive role in the infection process illuminate previously unknown mechanisms of pathogenicity operating in biotrophic fungi. Genomic analysis is, similarly, likely to open up new avenues for the discovery of virulence determinants in other pathogens. ©2006 Nature Publishing Group.J.K., M. B. and R.K. thank G. Sawers and U. Kämper for critical reading of the manuscript. The genome sequencing of Ustilago maydis strain 521 is part of the fungal genome initiative and was funded by National Human Genome Research Institute (USA) and BayerCropScience AG (Germany). F.B. was supported by a grant from the National Institutes of Health (USA). J.K. and R.K. thank the German Ministry of Education and Science (BMBF) for financing the DNA array setup and the Max Planck Society for their support of the manual genome annotation. F.B. was supported by a grant from the National Institutes of Health, B.J.S. was supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and the Canada Foundation for Innovation, J.W.K. received funding from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, J.R.-H. received funding from CONACYT, México, A.M.-M. was supported by a fellowship from the Humboldt Foundation, and L.M. was supported by an EU grant. Author Contributions All authors were involved in planning and executing the genome sequencing project. B.W.B., J.G., L.-J.M., E.W.M., D.D., C.M.W., J.B., S.Y., D.B.J., S.C., C.N., E.K., G.F., P.H.S., I.H.-H., M. Vaupel, H.V., T.S., J.M., D.P., C.S., A.G., F.C. and V. Vysotskaia contributed to the three independent sequencing projects; M.M., G.M., U.G., D.H., M.O. and H.-W.M. were responsible for gene model refinement, database design and database maintenance; G.M., J. Kämper, R.K., G.S., M. Feldbrügge, J.S., C.W.B., U.F., M.B., B.S., B.J.S., M.J.C., E.C.H.H., S.M., F.B., J.W.K., K.J.B., J. Klose, S.E.G., S.J.K., M.H.P., H.A.B.W., R.deV., H.J.D., J.R.-H., C.G.R.-P., L.O.-C., M.McC., K.S., J.P.-M., J.I.I., W.H., P.G., P.S.-A., M. Farman, J.E.S., R.S., J.M.G.-P., J.C.K., W.L. and D.H. were involved in functional annotation and interpretation; T.B., O.M., L.M., A.M.-M., D.G., K.M., N.R., V. Vincon, M. VraneŠ, M.S. and O.L. performed experiments. J. Kämper, R.K. and M.B. wrote and edited the paper with input from L.-J.M., J.G., F.B., J.W.K., B.J.S. and S.E.G. Individual contributions of authors can be found as Supplementary Notes

Situation, Figuration und Gewalt. Versuch eines gewaltsoziologischen Dialoges zwischen Randall Collins und Norbert Elias am Beispiel sexueller Kriegsgewalt

Ebner J, Stopfinger M. Situation, Figuration und Gewalt. Versuch eines gewaltsoziologischen Dialoges zwischen Randall Collins und Norbert Elias am Beispiel sexueller Kriegsgewalt. Österreichische Zeitschrift für Soziologie. 2020;45(S1):43-67.In diesem Beitrag werden zwei in der soziologischen Gewaltforschung etablierte Ansätze – die mikrosoziologisch-situationistische Gewalttheorie von Randall Collins und die figurations- bzw. prozesssoziologische Perspektive von Norbert Elias – auf ihre Eignung für die Analyse von sexueller Kriegsgewalt überprüft. Nach einer kurzen Diskussion des Forschungsstandes zu sexueller Kriegsgewalt wird dieses Thema einmal mit Collins und einmal mit Elias beleuchtet. Danach werden die beiden Zugänge einander gegenübergestellt, um Unterschiede und Gemeinsamkeiten herauszuarbeiten. Darauf aufbauend wird versucht, die Fruchtbarkeit eines „pragmatischen Dialoges“ zwischen einem mikro- und einem figurationssoziologisch inspirierten Ansatz auszuloten. Abschließend wird diskutiert, welche Folgerungen sich daraus für die Forschung zu sexueller Kriegsgewalt ergeben.In this paper, two approaches established in sociological violence research – Randall Collins’ micro-sociological theory of violence and Norbert Elias’ figuration- and process-sociological perspective—are examined for their suitability for the analysis of sexual violence in war. After a brief discussion of the current state of research on sexual violence in war, this topic will be examined once with Collins and once with Elias. The two approaches are then juxtaposed in order to highlight differences and similarities. Building on this, the fruitfulness of a “pragmatic dialogue” between a micro- and a figuration-sociologically inspired approach will be explored. The concluding section discusses the implications for research on sexual violence in war

Art and Prices: Reputation as a Mechanism for Reducing Uncertainty in the Art Market

Wie kommen die Preise für zeitgenössische Kunst zustande? Die Käufer dieser Kunst stehen vor einem Problem fundamentaler Ungewissheit, da „Qualität“ nur schwer zu bestimmen und die Wertentwicklung als Investitionsobjekt kaum abzuschätzen ist. Da ein Markt für zeitgenössische Kunst die Möglichkeit zumindest begrenzt rationaler Kaufentscheidungen voraussetzt, muss diese Ungewissheit abgebaut werden. Unsere These lautet, dass der Wert eines Kunstwerks oder Künstlers in einem intersubjektiven Prozess der Bewertung und Reputationsverleihung durch Experten und Institutionen im Feld der Kunst entsteht. Dies geschieht vornehmlich durch die Institutionen des Kunstmarktes und der Künstlerausbildung, also durch Galeristen, Kuratoren, Kritiker, Kunsthändler, Journalisten, Sammler und Kunsthochschulen, die gemeinsam an der Herstellung der künstlerischen Reputation eines Werks oder eines Künstlers beteiligt sind, die dann wiederum die Grundlage für die Bestimmung des ökonomischen Wertes ist. Zur Überprüfung dieser Ausgangshypothese wurden zwei Datensätze mit Daten zu den Biografien von Künstlern erstellt und ausgewertet.How are prices established in the market for contemporary art? Buyers in this market are confronted with fundamental uncertainty since “quality” is only difficult to determine and the development of prices is non-predictable. Since the emergence of a market for contemporary art presupposes at least the possibility for intentional rational decision-making, this uncertainty must be reduced. We argue that the value of a piece of art or an artist is established in an intersubjective process of granting reputation by experts and institutions in the field of art. This is achieved primarily through the institutions of the art market and the training of artists, i.e. through galleries, curators, critics, art dealers, journalists, collectors, and art schools. They participate jointly in the making of artistic reputation of the artist’s work that provides, in turn, the basis for the determination of its economic value. For testing this hypothesis we assembled and analyzed two datasets with data on the biographies of artists and prices for their works

The Price of Art. Uncertainty and Reputation in the Art Field

How do prices for contemporary art come into being? Buyers of contemporary art face a problem of fundamental uncertainty, because what passes as quality is difficult to determine, and buyers can hardly estimate how a specific piece of art will perform as an investment. Since a market for contemporary art presupposes the possibility of at least limited rational purchasing decisions, uncertainty must be reduced. We argue that the value of an art work or artist originates in an intersubjective process of assessment and conferring of reputation by experts in the art field, such as gallery owners, curators, critics, art dealers, journalists, and collectors, who help establish the artistic reputation of a work or an artist. The quality signals emerging from the art field enable buyers to assess the economic value of art works. We tested this initial hypothesis against two datasets containing data on art prices and information from the biographies of artists

Confused consumers?

Jens Beckert and Jörg Rössel explore the question of how the prices of artworks are established. In their opinion, the classical deduction that arises by analyzing the market is insufficient. In contrast to other goods, pricing for artworks cannot be determined by rules based on production cost or other objective factors. Contemporary works of art create particular uncertainty on the market. The decisive factor for this is a work's artistic quality, which is determined by an evaluation process carried out by specialists, gallery owners, art critics and art institutions. New studies show that a rise in prices for an artist's work after his death only occurs if the artist enjoyed a corresponding reputation during his lifetime