Cargando…

Evaluation of Secretion Prediction Highlights Differing Approaches Needed for Oomycete and Fungal Effectors

The steadily increasing number of sequenced fungal and oomycete genomes has enabled detailed studies of how these eukaryotic microbes infect plants and cause devastating losses in food crops. During infection, fungal and oomycete pathogens secrete effector molecules which manipulate host plant cell...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sperschneider, Jana, Williams, Angela H., Hane, James K., Singh, Karam B., Taylor, Jennifer M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4688413/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26779196
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.01168
_version_ 1782406733509951488
author Sperschneider, Jana
Williams, Angela H.
Hane, James K.
Singh, Karam B.
Taylor, Jennifer M.
author_facet Sperschneider, Jana
Williams, Angela H.
Hane, James K.
Singh, Karam B.
Taylor, Jennifer M.
author_sort Sperschneider, Jana
collection PubMed
description The steadily increasing number of sequenced fungal and oomycete genomes has enabled detailed studies of how these eukaryotic microbes infect plants and cause devastating losses in food crops. During infection, fungal and oomycete pathogens secrete effector molecules which manipulate host plant cell processes to the pathogen's advantage. Proteinaceous effectors are synthesized intracellularly and must be externalized to interact with host cells. Computational prediction of secreted proteins from genomic sequences is an important technique to narrow down the candidate effector repertoire for subsequent experimental validation. In this study, we benchmark secretion prediction tools on experimentally validated fungal and oomycete effectors. We observe that for a set of fungal SwissProt protein sequences, SignalP 4 and the neural network predictors of SignalP 3 (D-score) and SignalP 2 perform best. For effector prediction in particular, the use of a sensitive method can be desirable to obtain the most complete candidate effector set. We show that the neural network predictors of SignalP 2 and 3, as well as TargetP were the most sensitive tools for fungal effector secretion prediction, whereas the hidden Markov model predictors of SignalP 2 and 3 were the most sensitive tools for oomycete effectors. Thus, previous versions of SignalP retain value for oomycete effector prediction, as the current version, SignalP 4, was unable to reliably predict the signal peptide of the oomycete Crinkler effectors in the test set. Our assessment of subcellular localization predictors shows that cytoplasmic effectors are often predicted as not extracellular. This limits the reliability of secretion predictions that depend on these tools. We present our assessment with a view to informing future pathogenomics studies and suggest revised pipelines for secretion prediction to obtain optimal effector predictions in fungi and oomycetes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4688413
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46884132016-01-15 Evaluation of Secretion Prediction Highlights Differing Approaches Needed for Oomycete and Fungal Effectors Sperschneider, Jana Williams, Angela H. Hane, James K. Singh, Karam B. Taylor, Jennifer M. Front Plant Sci Plant Science The steadily increasing number of sequenced fungal and oomycete genomes has enabled detailed studies of how these eukaryotic microbes infect plants and cause devastating losses in food crops. During infection, fungal and oomycete pathogens secrete effector molecules which manipulate host plant cell processes to the pathogen's advantage. Proteinaceous effectors are synthesized intracellularly and must be externalized to interact with host cells. Computational prediction of secreted proteins from genomic sequences is an important technique to narrow down the candidate effector repertoire for subsequent experimental validation. In this study, we benchmark secretion prediction tools on experimentally validated fungal and oomycete effectors. We observe that for a set of fungal SwissProt protein sequences, SignalP 4 and the neural network predictors of SignalP 3 (D-score) and SignalP 2 perform best. For effector prediction in particular, the use of a sensitive method can be desirable to obtain the most complete candidate effector set. We show that the neural network predictors of SignalP 2 and 3, as well as TargetP were the most sensitive tools for fungal effector secretion prediction, whereas the hidden Markov model predictors of SignalP 2 and 3 were the most sensitive tools for oomycete effectors. Thus, previous versions of SignalP retain value for oomycete effector prediction, as the current version, SignalP 4, was unable to reliably predict the signal peptide of the oomycete Crinkler effectors in the test set. Our assessment of subcellular localization predictors shows that cytoplasmic effectors are often predicted as not extracellular. This limits the reliability of secretion predictions that depend on these tools. We present our assessment with a view to informing future pathogenomics studies and suggest revised pipelines for secretion prediction to obtain optimal effector predictions in fungi and oomycetes. Frontiers Media S.A. 2015-12-23 /pmc/articles/PMC4688413/ /pubmed/26779196 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.01168 Text en Copyright © 2015 Sperschneider, Williams, Hane, Singh and Taylor. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Plant Science
Sperschneider, Jana
Williams, Angela H.
Hane, James K.
Singh, Karam B.
Taylor, Jennifer M.
Evaluation of Secretion Prediction Highlights Differing Approaches Needed for Oomycete and Fungal Effectors
title Evaluation of Secretion Prediction Highlights Differing Approaches Needed for Oomycete and Fungal Effectors
title_full Evaluation of Secretion Prediction Highlights Differing Approaches Needed for Oomycete and Fungal Effectors
title_fullStr Evaluation of Secretion Prediction Highlights Differing Approaches Needed for Oomycete and Fungal Effectors
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of Secretion Prediction Highlights Differing Approaches Needed for Oomycete and Fungal Effectors
title_short Evaluation of Secretion Prediction Highlights Differing Approaches Needed for Oomycete and Fungal Effectors
title_sort evaluation of secretion prediction highlights differing approaches needed for oomycete and fungal effectors
topic Plant Science
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4688413/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26779196
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.01168
work_keys_str_mv AT sperschneiderjana evaluationofsecretionpredictionhighlightsdifferingapproachesneededforoomyceteandfungaleffectors
AT williamsangelah evaluationofsecretionpredictionhighlightsdifferingapproachesneededforoomyceteandfungaleffectors
AT hanejamesk evaluationofsecretionpredictionhighlightsdifferingapproachesneededforoomyceteandfungaleffectors
AT singhkaramb evaluationofsecretionpredictionhighlightsdifferingapproachesneededforoomyceteandfungaleffectors
AT taylorjenniferm evaluationofsecretionpredictionhighlightsdifferingapproachesneededforoomyceteandfungaleffectors