Multiple Translocation of the AVR-Pita Effector Gene among Chromosomes of the Rice Blast Fungus Magnaporthe oryzae and Related Species

Magnaporthe oryzae is the causal agent of rice blast disease, a devastating problem worldwide. This fungus has caused breakdown of resistance conferred by newly developed commercial cultivars. To address how the rice blast fungus adapts itself to new resistance genes so quickly, we examined chromosomal locations of AVR-Pita, a subtelomeric gene family corresponding to the Pita resistance gene, in various isolates of M. oryzae (including wheat and millet pathogens) and its related species. We found that AVR-Pita (AVR-Pita1 and AVR-Pita2) is highly variable in its genome location, occurring in chromosomes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and supernumerary chromosomes, particularly in rice-infecting isolates. When expressed in M. oryzae, most of the AVR-Pita homologs could elicit Pita-mediated resistance, even those from non-rice isolates. AVR-Pita was flanked by a retrotransposon, which presumably contributed to its multiple translocation across the genome. On the other hand, family member AVR-Pita3, which lacks avirulence activity, was stably located on chromosome 7 in a vast majority of isolates. These results suggest that the diversification in genome location of AVR-Pita in the rice isolates is a consequence of recognition by Pita in rice. We propose a model that the multiple translocation of AVR-Pita may be associated with its frequent loss and recovery mediated by its transfer among individuals in asexual populations. This model implies that the high mobility of AVR-Pita is a key mechanism accounting for the rapid adaptation toward Pita. Dynamic adaptation of some fungal plant pathogens may be achieved by deletion and recovery of avirulence genes using a population as a unit of adaptation

Computational models in plant-pathogen interactions: the case of Phytophthora infestans

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p><it>Phytophthora infestans </it>is a devastating oomycete pathogen of potato production worldwide. This review explores the use of computational models for studying the molecular interactions between <it>P. infestans </it>and one of its hosts, <it>Solanum tuberosum</it>.</p> <p>Modeling and conclusion</p> <p>Deterministic logistics models have been widely used to study pathogenicity mechanisms since the early 1950s, and have focused on processes at higher biological resolution levels. In recent years, owing to the availability of high throughput biological data and computational resources, interest in stochastic modeling of plant-pathogen interactions has grown. Stochastic models better reflect the behavior of biological systems. Most modern approaches to plant pathology modeling require molecular kinetics information. Unfortunately, this information is not available for many plant pathogens, including <it>P. infestans</it>. Boolean formalism has compensated for the lack of kinetics; this is especially the case where comparative genomics, protein-protein interactions and differential gene expression are the most common data resources.</p

Single-dose administration and the influence of the timing of the booster dose on immunogenicity and efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine: a pooled analysis of four randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: The ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) vaccine has been approved for emergency use by the UK regulatory authority, Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, with a regimen of two standard doses given with an interval of 4-12 weeks. The planned roll-out in the UK will involve vaccinating people in high-risk categories with their first dose immediately, and delivering the second dose 12 weeks later. Here, we provide both a further prespecified pooled analysis of trials of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and exploratory analyses of the impact on immunogenicity and efficacy of extending the interval between priming and booster doses. In addition, we show the immunogenicity and protection afforded by the first dose, before a booster dose has been offered. METHODS: We present data from three single-blind randomised controlled trials-one phase 1/2 study in the UK (COV001), one phase 2/3 study in the UK (COV002), and a phase 3 study in Brazil (COV003)-and one double-blind phase 1/2 study in South Africa (COV005). As previously described, individuals 18 years and older were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive two standard doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (5 × 1010 viral particles) or a control vaccine or saline placebo. In the UK trial, a subset of participants received a lower dose (2·2 × 1010 viral particles) of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 for the first dose. The primary outcome was virologically confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 disease, defined as a nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)-positive swab combined with at least one qualifying symptom (fever ≥37·8°C, cough, shortness of breath, or anosmia or ageusia) more than 14 days after the second dose. Secondary efficacy analyses included cases occuring at least 22 days after the first dose. Antibody responses measured by immunoassay and by pseudovirus neutralisation were exploratory outcomes. All cases of COVID-19 with a NAAT-positive swab were adjudicated for inclusion in the analysis by a masked independent endpoint review committee. The primary analysis included all participants who were SARS-CoV-2 N protein seronegative at baseline, had had at least 14 days of follow-up after the second dose, and had no evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection from NAAT swabs. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose. The four trials are registered at ISRCTN89951424 (COV003) and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606 (COV001), NCT04400838 (COV002), and NCT04444674 (COV005). FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Dec 6, 2020, 24 422 participants were recruited and vaccinated across the four studies, of whom 17 178 were included in the primary analysis (8597 receiving ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and 8581 receiving control vaccine). The data cutoff for these analyses was Dec 7, 2020. 332 NAAT-positive infections met the primary endpoint of symptomatic infection more than 14 days after the second dose. Overall vaccine efficacy more than 14 days after the second dose was 66·7% (95% CI 57·4-74·0), with 84 (1·0%) cases in the 8597 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 248 (2·9%) in the 8581 participants in the control group. There were no hospital admissions for COVID-19 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group after the initial 21-day exclusion period, and 15 in the control group. 108 (0·9%) of 12 282 participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 127 (1·1%) of 11 962 participants in the control group had serious adverse events. There were seven deaths considered unrelated to vaccination (two in the ChAdOx1 nCov-19 group and five in the control group), including one COVID-19-related death in one participant in the control group. Exploratory analyses showed that vaccine efficacy after a single standard dose of vaccine from day 22 to day 90 after vaccination was 76·0% (59·3-85·9). Our modelling analysis indicated that protection did not wane during this initial 3-month period. Similarly, antibody levels were maintained during this period with minimal waning by day 90 (geometric mean ratio [GMR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·59-0·74]). In the participants who received two standard doses, after the second dose, efficacy was higher in those with a longer prime-boost interval (vaccine efficacy 81·3% [95% CI 60·3-91·2] at ≥12 weeks) than in those with a short interval (vaccine efficacy 55·1% [33·0-69·9] at <6 weeks). These observations are supported by immunogenicity data that showed binding antibody responses more than two-fold higher after an interval of 12 or more weeks compared with an interval of less than 6 weeks in those who were aged 18-55 years (GMR 2·32 [2·01-2·68]). INTERPRETATION: The results of this primary analysis of two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 were consistent with those seen in the interim analysis of the trials and confirm that the vaccine is efficacious, with results varying by dose interval in exploratory analyses. A 3-month dose interval might have advantages over a programme with a short dose interval for roll-out of a pandemic vaccine to protect the largest number of individuals in the population as early as possible when supplies are scarce, while also improving protection after receiving a second dose. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR), The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, the Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

An empirical method to estimate the effect of soil on the rate for transmission of damping‐off disease

The ability of some soils to suppress soil-borne diseases has been long recognised, but the underlying epidemiological mechanisms by which this occurs are largely unknown.• Using damping-off disease caused by Rhizoctonia solani, spreading through replicated populations of radish (Raphanus sativus) seedlings growing in soil or sand, we introduce and test a method to show how the suppressive effects of soil affect the rates of primary and secondary infection, which control amplification and spread of disease. The method involves spatial mapping of disease over time combined with an epidemiological analysis to distinguish primary from secondary infection in a dynamically changing population of susceptible hosts available for infection.• Analysis of the secondary transmission rates revealed three main trends: the transmission rate was lower for soil compared with sand; the transmission rate varied systematically with time, first increasing and then decreasing; and the transmission rate varied amongst replicate epidemics.• The consequences of these findings for damping-off epidemics and the potential of this type of analysis to contribute to an epidemiological understanding of the effect of soil on the suppression of epidemics are discussed