A pathogen effector FOLD diversified in symbiotic fungi
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Summary: Pathogenic fungi use secreted effector proteins to suppress immunity and support their infection, but effectors have also been reported from fungi that engage in nutritional symbioses with plants. Sequence‐based effector comparisons between pathogens and symbiotic arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi are hampered by the huge diversity of effector sequences even within closely related microbes. To find sequence‐divergent but structurally similar effectors shared between symbiotic and pathogenic fungi, we compared secreted protein structure models of the AM fungus Rhizophagus irregularis to known pathogen effectors. We identified proteins with structural similarity to known Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. lycopersici dual domain (FOLD) effectors, which occur in low numbers in several fungal pathogens. Contrastingly, FOLD genes from AM fungi (MycFOLDs) are found in enlarged and diversified gene families with higher levels of positive selection in their C‐terminal domains. Our structure model comparison suggests that MycFOLDs are similar to carbohydrate‐binding motifs. Different MycFOLD genes are expressed during colonisation of different hosts and MycFOLD‐17 transcripts accumulate in plant intracellular arbuscules. The exclusive presence of MycFOLDs across unrelated plant‐colonising fungi, their inducible expression, lineage‐specific sequence diversification and transcripts in arbuscules suggest that FOLD proteins act as effectors during plant colonisation of symbiotic and pathogenic fungi.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold
Jumper, J., Evans, R., Pritzel, A., Green, T., Figurnov, M., Ronneberger, O., Tunyasuvunakool, K., Bates, R., Žídek, A., Potapenko, A., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2 · Cited by 43,764 · see citing works
ColabFold - Making protein folding accessible to all
Mirdita, M., Schütze, K., Moriwaki, Y., Heo, L., Ovchinnikov, S., & Steinegger, M. (2021) · doi:10.1101/2021.08.15.456425 · Cited by 9,391 · see citing works
Fast and accurate protein structure search with Foldseek
van Kempen, M., Kim, S. S., Tumescheit, C., Mirdita, M., Lee, J., Gilchrist, C. L. M., Söding, J., & Steinegger, M. (2022) · doi:10.1101/2022.02.07.479398 · Cited by 2,598 · see citing works
Fast and accurate protein structure search with Foldseek
van Kempen, M., Kim, S. S., Tumescheit, C., Mirdita, M., Lee, J., Gilchrist, C. L. M., Söding, J., & Steinegger, M. (2024) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/s41587-023-01773-0 · Cited by 2,596 · see citing works
A structural biology community assessment of AlphaFold2 applications
Akdel, M., Pires, D. E. V., Pardo, E. P., Jänes, J., Zalevsky, A. O., Mészáros, B., Bryant, P., Good, L. L., Laskowski, R. A., Pozzati, G., et al. (2022) · Nature Structural & Molecular Biology · doi:10.1038/s41594-022-00849-w · Cited by 675 · see citing works
AlphaFold2 reveals commonalities and novelties in protein structure space for 21 model organisms
Bordin, N., Sillitoe, I., Nallapareddy, V., Rauer, C., Lam, S. D., Waman, V. P., Sen, N., Heinzinger, M., Littmann, M., Kim, S., et al. (2023) · Communications Biology · doi:10.1038/s42003-023-04488-9 · Cited by 103 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Teulet, A., Quan, C., Evangelisti, E., Wanke, A., Yang, W., & Schornack, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Cambridge (GB)
- Sainsbury Laboratory University of Cambridge Cambridge CB2 1LR UK
- Corresponding author
- Schornack, Sebastian
- Venue
- New Phytologist
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2023-05-31
- Volume
- 239
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 1127-1139
- ISSN
- 0028-646X (ISSN-L)
- 1469-8137
- OpenAlex
- W4378800961
- Cited by
- 40
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 6
- FWCI
- 6.31
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- New Phytologist (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- HAL (submittedVersion)
- Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Apollo (cc-by)
- Funders
- Gatsby Charitable Foundation (GAT3395/GLD)
- H2020 European Research Council (ACHILLES‐HEEL, 637537)
- Royal Society (UF160413)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Mycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Plant Pathogens and Fungal Diseases
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant-Microbe Interactions and Immunity
- Keywords
- arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi, Glomus intraradices, Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. lycopersici, fungal effectors, positive selection, gene family diversification, arbuscules, plant-fungal symbiosis, fungal pathogenesis
- MeSH terms
- Fungal Proteins, Fungi, Plants, Symbiosis, Gene Expression Regulation, Plant, Plant Roots, Mycorrhizae
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review