Submit a preprint

628

Durable resistance or efficient disease control? Adult Plant Resistance (APR) at the heart of the dilemmause asterix (*) to get italics
Loup Rimbaud, Julien Papaïx, Jean-François Rey, Benoît Moury, Luke G. Barrett, Peter H. ThrallPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"
2023
<p style="text-align: justify;">Adult plant resistance (APR) is an incomplete and delayed protection of plants against pathogens. At first glance, such resistance should be less efficient than classical major-effect resistance genes, which confer complete resistance from seedling stage, to reduce epidemics. However, by allowing some leaky levels of disease, APR genes are predicted to be more durable than major genes because they exert a weaker selection pressure on pathogens towards adaptation to resistance. However, the impact of partial efficiency and delayed mode of action of APR on the evolutionary and epidemiological outcomes of resistance deployment has never been tested.</p> <p style="text-align: justify;">Using the demogenetic, spatially explicit, temporal, stochastic model landsepi, this study is a first attempt to investigate how resistance efficiency, age at the time of resistance activation and target pathogenicity trait jointly impact resistance durability and disease control at the landscape scale. Our numerical experiments explore the deployment of APR in a simulated agricultural landscape, alone or together with a major resistance gene. As a case study, the mathematical model has been parameterised for rust fungi (genus Puccinia) of cereal crops, for which extensive data are available.</p> <p style="text-align: justify;">Our simulations confirm that weak efficiency and delayed activation of APR genes reduce the selection pressure applied on pathogens and their propensity to overcome resistance, but do not confer effective protection. On the other hand, stronger APR genes (which increase selection pressure on the pathogen) may be quickly overcome but have the potential to provide some disease protection in the short-term. This is attributed to strong competition between different pathogen genotypes and the presence of fitness costs of adaptation, especially when APR genes are deployed together with major resistance gene via crop mixtures or rotations.</p>
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.08.30.505787v2.supplementary-materialYou should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https://
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.08.30.505787v2.supplementary-materialYou should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https://
https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/landsepi/index.htmlYou should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://
adaptation, adult plant resistance, disease control, immunity, mature plant resistance, ontogenic, puccinia, resistance, resistance durability, rust, simulation modelling.
NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).
Adaptation, Evolutionary Applications, Evolutionary Epidemiology
Méline Saubin, meline.saubin@inrae.fr, Pauline Clin, auline.clin@agrocampus-ouest.fr, Fabien Halkett, fabien.halkett@inrae.fr, Frédéric Hamelin, frederic.hamelin@agrocampus-ouest.fr, Nik Cunniffe, njc1001@cam.ac.uk, Benjamin Watkinson-Powell, bmw45@cam.ac.uk, Jiasui Zhan, jiasui.zhan@slu.se
e.g. John Doe john@doe.com
No need for them to be recommenders of PCIEvolBiol. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct
e.g. John Doe john@doe.com
2022-09-02 16:36:32
Timothée Poisot