Transgenic corn with antifungal peptide AGM182 (DN:0113.18)
11690894 · 2023-07-04
Assignee
- GENVOR INC. (Dallas, TX, US)
- The United States Of America, As Represented By The Secretary Of Agriculture (Washington, DC)
Inventors
- Jesse M. Jaynes (Auburn, AL)
- Kanniah Rajasekaran (Metairie, LA)
- Jeffrey W. Cary (Covington, LA)
- Ronald Sayler (Farmington, AR, US)
- Rajtilak Majumdar (Metairie, LA, US)
Cpc classification
International classification
Abstract
Aspergillus flavus is an opportunistic, saprophytic fungus that infects maize and other fatty acid-rich food and feed crops and produces toxic and carcinogenic secondary metabolites known as aflatoxins. In vitro studies showed a five-fold increase in antifungal activity of AGM182 (vs. tachyplesin1) against A. flavus. Transgenic maize plants expressing AGM182 under maize Ubiquitin-1 promoter were produced through Agrobacterium-mediated transformation. PCR products confirmed integration of the AGM182 gene, while RT-PCR of maize RNA confirmed the presence of AGM182 transcripts. Maize kernel screening assay using a highly aflatoxigenic A. flavus strain (AF70) showed up to 72% reduction in fungal growth in the transgenic AGM182 seeds compared to isogenic negative control seeds.
Claims
1. A method to produce transgenic maize lines expressing a synthetic AGM182 peptide, the method comprising the steps of: producing a transgenic maize line through an agrobacterium mediated transformation of the AGM182 gene into immature maize embryos, wherein the AGM182 gene comprises a 129 bp nucleic acid of SEQ ID NO:3.
2. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the nucleic acid of SEQ ID NO:3 encodes an amino acid sequence of the AGM182 peptide of SEQ ID NO: 4.
3. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the AGM182 peptide is effective against mycotoxin producing fungal species and with no toxicity against mammals.
4. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the AGM182 peptide reduces the growth of the mycotoxin producing fungal species Aspergillus Flavus.
5. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the AGM182 peptide reduces the growth of Aspergillus Flavus by 72% in transgenic maize lines.
6. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the AGM182 peptide reduces the growth of mycotoxin producing fungal species, wherein the fungal species is Fusarium.
7. The method as claimed in claim 3, wherein the mycotoxin is aflatoxin.
8. The method as claimed in claim 1, wherein the AGM182 peptide reduces an aflatoxin contamination by 76-98% in transgenic maize lines.
9. A transgenic maize line expressing an AGM182 peptide of SEQ ID NO:4 that reduces aflatoxin production and fungal growth of Aspergillus Flavus.
10. The transgenic maize line as claimed in claim 9, wherein the synthetic AGM182 peptide, reduces the growth of the Aspergillus Flavus by 72%.
11. The transgenic maize line as claimed in claim 9, wherein the synthetic AGM182 peptide reduces the aflatoxin contamination by 76-98%.
12. An antimicrobial peptide AGM182 of SEQ ID NO:4.
13. The antimicrobial peptide as claimed in claim 12, wherein the synthetic antimicrobial AGM182 peptide has a five-fold higher antimicrobial activity (IC50=2.5 μM) compared to naturally occurring antimicrobial peptide tachyplesin 1 (IC50=12.5 μM).
14. A vector comprising an AGM182 gene that comprises a 129 bp nucleic acid of SEQ ID NO:3.
15. The vector of claim 14, wherein the vector is an expression vector.
16. The vector of claim 14, wherein the vector is a pMCG 1005 plasmid and the AGM182 gene is operatively linked to a constitutive Ubi-1 (maize) promoter.
17. The vector of claim 14, wherein the vector further comprises a maize alcohol dehydrogenase-1 (Adh-1) intron that is 5′ from the AGM182 gene start codon, wherein the Adh-1 intron improves the expression of the AGM182 gene.
18. The vector of claim 14, wherein the vector further comprises a barley alpha amylase signal peptide (BAAS) nucleic acid sequence that is 5′ from the AGM182 gene, wherein the BAAS peptide increases the efficiency of the synthetic AGM182 peptide excretion from the host cell to the cell wall.
19. A method of preventing or treating a plant to reduce a growth of a mycotoxin producing fungal species comprising: spraying a seed, seedling, or plant with an AGM182 peptide of SEQ ID NO: 4 in an amount sufficient to prevent or treat the growth of the mycotoxin producing fungal species.
Description
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
(8)
(9) The main highlights of the present invention can be summarized as:
(10) Designed the synthetic peptide AGM182 modeled after the naturally occurring tachyplesin 1.
(11) AGM182 was five-times more effective in controlling Aspergillus flavus compared to tachyplesin 1.
(12) Transgenic maize plants expressing the synthetic peptide AGM182 were produced and advanced to third generation by selfing.
(13) Kernel Screening Assay showed significant reduction in fungal growth (72%) and spread inside transgenic kernels.
(14) Concomitant, significant reduction in aflatoxin levels (76-98%) was also achieved in transgenic kernels.
(15) The abbreviations to be used in the present specification are: RB=right border, LB=left border, Ubi-1=maize Ubiquitin) promoter (constitutive), Int=intron (maize alcohol dehydrogenase-1; Adh1), AGM182=gene of interest; BAAS=barley alpha amylase signal peptide, ocs (octopine synthase)=terminator, nos (nopaline synthase)=terminator, 4×35S=constitutive cauliflower mosaic virus promoter, Bar=phosphinothricin acetyltransferase gene for BASTA herbicide resistance.
(16) Materials and Methods
(17) In Silico Analysis of AGM182
(18) The synthetic peptide AGM182 used in the current study were designed based on the known antimicrobial peptide tachyplesin1 (
(19) Plasmid Constructs and Maize Transformation
(20) A 129 bp fragment of the AGM182 gene (SEQ ID NO:3) was synthesized (IDT; Coralville, Iowa) and cloned in to the pMCG 1005 vector [28] (provided by Dr. Kan Wang, IA State University). The synthetic AGM182 gene (codon optimized for expression in maize) was expressed under the constitutive Ubi-1 (maize) promoter present in the plant destination vector. The maize alcohol dehydrogenase-1 (Adh1) intron present in the transgene cassette (upstream of the AGM182 start codon) was incorporated to improve the expression of AGM182 in maize (monocot) and the barley alpha amylase signal peptide (BAAS) was fused to the N-terminal end of the AGM182 gene (
(21) μmol m-2 s-1) in a growth chamber for 4 weeks and then moved in to the greenhouse in 5-gallon (19 L) pots [31]. Transgenic plants from independently transformed events were grown in moist soil mix containing 3 parts Scott's 360 Metro-Mix (Scotts Company, Marysville, Ohio) and 1 part perlite in 7.5 cm pots and were selfed to obtain T.sub.3 generation kernels. Isogenic maize lines that went through transformation process but tested negative by PCR and herbicide assay [31] were used as negative controls.
(22) Fungal Strain and Bioassay with Peptides
(23) Aspergillus flavus 70-GFP [32] was grown at 31° C. on V8 medium (5% V8 juice, 2% agar, pH 5.2). Spores from 6-day old cultures were suspended in 0.02% Triton X-100; the conidial concentration was determined with a hemocytometer and adjusted to 4×10.sup.6 conidia ml-1.
(24) Peptides were freshly dissolved in sterilized water and used for antifungal bioassays as reported [19]. Briefly, pre-germinated conidial suspensions (4×10.sup.6 conidia ml.sup.−1) of A. flavus 70-GFP were treated with the peptides at 0-25 μM concentrations for 60 min before spreading on Potato Dextrose Agar plates (9 cm day). Fungal colonies were enumerated following incubation at 30° C. for 24 h.
(25) PCR Screening of Transgenic Maize Kernels
(26) Maize seeds were flash frozen and ground using a 2010 Geno/Grinder (SPEX SamplePrep, Metuchen, N.J.). Transgenic plants were screened through PCR using ‘Phire Plant Direct PCR Kit’ (ThermoFisher Scientific, Waltham, Mass.) according to the manufacturer's protocol. The screening primers used in this study were, AGM182_F1: 5′-ATGGCCAACAAGCATCTGTC-3′ (SEQ ID NO: 7) and AGM182_R1: 5′-CCGCGCCTTTATACAGAACT-3′ (SEQ ID NO: 8). A 51° C. annealing temperature and 10 s elongation time were used to amplify a 129 bp DNA fragment to confirm the presence of the AGM182 gene in the transgenic maize plants.
(27) RNA Isolation, cDNA Synthesis, and Semi-Quantitative RT-PCR
(28) Pulverized maize seeds were used for RNA isolation using the Spectrum™ Plant Total RNA kit′ (Sigma-Aldrich, St Louis, Mo.). cDNA was synthesized using iScript™ cDNA synthesis kit (Bio-Rad, Hercules, Calif.) according to the manufacturer's protocol. Semi-quantitative RT-PCR was performed using T100™ thermal cycler system (Bio-Rad) and Phusion® High-Fidelity DNA Polymerase (New England Biolabs, Ipswich, Mass.). The thermocycling conditions included a
(29) pre-incubation at 98° C. for 30 s followed by 30 cycles of 98° C. for 10 s (denaturation), 51.5° C. for 30 s (primer annealing), 72° C. for 5 s (elongation), and a final extension step at 72° C. for 5 min. The primers used for RT-PCR of AGM182 in transgenic plants are qAGM182-F2 5′-TGGCCAACAAGCATCTGT-3′ SEQ ID NO: 9) and qAGM182-R2 5′-ACAGGCGCGCTTTAATCT-3′ (SEQ ID NO: 10) and maize ribosomal structural gene (Rib), GRMZM2G024838 [33], qRib-F 5′-GGCTTGGCTTAAAGGAAGGT-3′ (SEQ ID NO: 11) and qRib-R 5′-TCAGTCCAACTTCCAGAATGG-3′ (SEQ ID NO: 12).
(30) Kernel Screening Assay
(31) Undamaged T.sub.3 maize and negative control seeds were surface-sterilized with 70% ethanol and subjected to the Kernel Screening Assay (KSA) [32]. Surface-sterilized seeds were briefly immersed in a 4×10.sup.6 conidial inoculum and incubated in the dark at 31° C. and high humidity (>95% RH). After seven days, four representative seeds were randomly chosen and photographed (bright field and fluorescence) using an Olympus SZH10 research stereomicroscope equipped with the Nikon Digital Camera DXM1200.
(32) GFP Fluorescence and Aflatoxin Analysis
(33) To quantify fungal fluorescence pulverized A. flavus infected maize seeds (50 mg FW) were extracted in 0.5 ml of Sorenson's phosphate buffer (pH 7.0). The samples were vortexed for 30 s followed by centrifugation at 10,000 g for 15 min. A 100 μl aliquot of the supernatant was transferred to each well of a 96 well plate and GFP fluorescence (excitation 485 nm, emission
(34) 535) were recorded using a plate reader (Biotek Synergy 4, Winooski, Vt.) [32, 34]. Relative Fluorescence Units (RFU) were normalized as percent values and used for statistical analysis from 12 biological replicates. Each replicate consisted of four randomly selected, PCR positive kernels. Following molecular analysis and GFP quantitation, seed samples were pooled together into four randomized replicates. Homogenates from three maize seeds were pooled, dried in a forced air oven (60° C.), and extracted with methylene chloride [35]. Sample residues were dissolved in 4.0 ml 80% methanol and total aflatoxin levels were measured with the FluoroQuant Afla Test Kit for Aflatoxin Analysis (Romer Labs, Union, Mo.).
(35) Statistical Analysis
(36) All data from two independent KSAs including fluorescence (12 biological replicates), and aflatoxin values (four randomized replicates) were subjected to one-way ANOVA and mean separation was performed using the Dunnett's posttest (P<0.05 or <0.01) using GraphPad Prism software (La Jolla, Calif.).
(37) Results
(38) Design and in Silico Analysis of AGM182
(39) The synthetic AGM182 peptide was designed based on the naturally occurring Tachyplesin I peptide from Japanese horseshoe crab. Analysis of amino acids in the AGM182 shows increase in positive charge density (vs. Tachyplesin1). While a similar ‘central bubble’ (CLGKFC)(SEQ ID NO: 5) has been maintained in the AGM182 compared to that of Tachyplesin1 (CYRGIC)(SEQ ID NO: 6), the second disulfide linkage of Tachyplesin1 was eliminated in AGM182 and replaced by a sequence that results into an amphipathic β-sheet structure conformation with maximized positive charge density for improved antifungal activity
(40) In Vitro Testing of Antimicrobial Activity of the Peptides
(41) The synthetic peptide AGM182 was evaluated for activity against A. flavus in comparison to the native peptide tachyplesin1. AGM182 showed fivefold increase in its IC.sub.50 value against A. flavus as compared to tachyplesin1 (IC.sub.50=2.5 μM vs. 12.5 μM;
(42) Maize Transformation and Molecular Screening of Transgenic Plants
(43) Transformation of maize (Hybrid Hi-II) was accomplished using the Agrobacterium tumefaciens EHA101-mediated transformation of immature embryos [31]. The codon-optimized synthetic AGM182 gene was expressed under the constitutive Ubi-1 promoter
(44) A. flavus Growth During Infection of Transgenic Seeds
(45) A. flavus growth was monitored in transgenic seeds using the KSA. Expression of the AGM182 gene in transgenic maize kernels resulted in a significant decrease in fungal growth as compared to the control (
(46) Aflatoxin Production in Transgenic Kernels
(47) Transgenic expression of the AGM182 gene in maize significantly reduced aflatoxin content in the transgenic lines as compared to the control. In general, between the two aflatoxins (B.sub.1 and B.sub.2) primarily detected in A. flavus infected maize kernels, aflatoxin B.sub.1 is the predominant aflatoxin. The aflatoxin data presented here is the total amount of aflatoxins detected in the infected kernels. A significant reduction in aflatoxin levels (76-98%) was observed in the different AGM182 lines as compared to an isogenic negative control (
(48) Discussion
(49) Designed synthetic peptides are effective against in controlling a broad spectrum of plant pathogens [5, 7, 9, 19, 36] including difficult-to-control, mycotoxin producing fungal species such as Aspergillus and Fusarium. Their advantages over naturally occurring peptides include increased resistance to proteolytic degradation [16, 37, 38], no or minimal effect on off-target beneficial microbial populations [22, 23] and they can be integrated into genomes of cultivated field, fruit and ornamental crops [20, 39-41] to provide resistance to diseases and toxin-producing fungal species. In the current study the synthetic antimicrobial peptide AGM182 was designed based on the naturally occurring AMP tachyplesin1 (
(50) The primary mode of action of these AMPs is membrane damage although AMPs have also been shown to be involved in cellular signaling and can modulate host defense responses [45, 46].
(51) Besides naturally occurring AMPs in plants, synthetic AMPs have demonstrated the ability to restrict pathogen growth in vitro or in planta (through transgenic approaches) [20, 39, 40, 47]. Earlier studies from our lab in cotton showed transgenic expression of a synthetic AMP, D4E1, significantly reduced A. flavus growth and aflatoxin production in cottonseed [20]. In this report we have demonstrated, prevention of preharvest aflatoxin contamination in a major food crop such as maize through transgenic expression of a tachyplesin-derived synthetic peptide, AGM182.
(52) In general, small peptides such as AGM182 used in the current study, could not be detected using the standard Western blotting technique in the transgenic plants. Detection of such small antimicrobial peptides in plants are often challenging due to their small size (18 amino acids in AGM182,
(53) The significant reduction in GFP fluorescence in the seeds of AGM182 transgenic maize lines (
(54) Overall, the results presented here demonstrated the effectiveness of the tachyplesin-derived synthetic peptide AGM182 on controlling A. flavus growth and aflatoxin contamination in transgenic maize kernels. In addition, this study highlights the potential application of synthetic biology to design efficiently a safe, synthetic AMP like AGM182. The KSA results, as reported in this study (
REFERENCES
(55) [1] CAST, Aflatoxins and other mycotoxins: An agricultural perspective, in, Council for Agricultural and Science Technology Reports, 2003. [2] F. Wu, Mycotoxin reduction in Bt corn: potential economic, health, and regulatory impacts, Transgenic Res., 15 (2006) 277-289. [3] N. Mitchell, E. Bowers, C. Hurburgh, F. Wu, Potential economic losses to the USA corn industry from aflatoxin contamination, Food Additives & Contaminants: Part A, 33 (2016) 540-550. [4] P. Udomkun, A. N. Wiredu, M. Nagle, J. Müller, B. Vanlauwe, R. Bandyopadhyay, Innovative technologies to manage aflatoxins in foods and feeds and the profitability of application—A review, Food Control, 76 (2017) 127-138. [5] J. F. Marcos, A. Munoz, E. Perez-Paya, S. Misra, B. Lopez-Garcia, Identification and rational design of novel antimicrobial peptides for plant protection, Annu. Rev. Phytopathol., 46 (2008) 273-301. [6] K. Rajasekaran, A. J. De Lucca, J. W. Cary, Aflatoxin control through transgenic approaches, Toxin Rev., 28 (2009) 89-101. [7] K. Rajasekaran, J. W. Cary, C. A. Chlan, Jaynes J. M., B. D., Strategies for controlling plant diseases and mycotoxin contamination using antimicrobial synthetic peptides, in: K. Rajasekaran, J. W. Cary, J. M. Jaynes, E. Montesinos (Eds.) ACS Symposium Book Series #1095: Small Wonders: Peptides for Disease Control, 2012, pp. 295-315. [8] E. Montesinos, Antimicrobial peptides and plant disease control, FEMS Microbiol. Lett., 270 (2007) 1-11. [9] J. W. Cary, K. Rajasekaran, R. L. Brown, M. Luo, Z. Y. Chen, D. Bhatnagar, Developing resistance to aflatoxin in maize and cottonseed, Toxins (Basel), 3 (2011) 678-696. [10] M. Zasloff, Antimicrobial peptides of multicellular organisms, Nature, 415 (2002) 389-395. [11] R. E. W. Hancock, H. G. Sahl, Antimicrobial and host-defense peptides as new anti-infective therapeutic strategies, Nat. Biotechnol., 24 (2006) 1551-1557. [12] T. Ganz, Defensins: antimicrobial peptides of innate immunity, Nat Rev Immune, 3 (2003) 710-720. [13] S. C. Barr, D. Rose, J. M. Jaynes, Activity of lytic peptides against intracellular Trypanosoma cruzi amastigotes in vitro and parasitemias in mice, J. Parasitol., 81 (1995) 974-978. [14] I. A. Edwards, A. G. Elliott, A. M. Kavanagh, J. Zuegg, M. A. Blaskovich, M. A. Cooper, Contribution of amphipathicity and hydrophobicity to the antimicrobial activity and cytotoxicity of beta-hairpin peptides, ACS Infect Dis, 2 (2016) 442-450. [15] U. Schwab, P. Gilligan, J. M. Jaynes, D. Henke, In vitro activities of designed antimicrobial peptides against multidrug-resistant cystic fibrosis pathogens, Antimicrob. Agents Chemother., 43 (1999) 1435-1440. A. J. DeLucca, J. M. Bland, C. Grimm, T. J. Jacks, J. W. Cary, J. M. Jaynes, T. E. Cleveland, T. J. Walsh, Fungicidal properties, sterol binding, and proteolytic resistance of the synthetic peptide D4E1, Canadian Journal of Microbiology, 44 (1998) 514-520. [16] M. R. Yeaman, N.Y. Yount, Mechanisms of antimicrobial peptide action and resistance, Pharmacol. Rev., 55 (2003) 27-55. [17] J. W. Cary, K. Rajasekaran, J. M. Jaynes, T. E. Cleveland, Transgenic expression of a gene encoding a synthetic antimicrobial peptide results in inhibition of fungal growth in vitro and in planta, Plant Sci., 154 (2000) 171-181. [18] K. Rajasekaran, K. D. Stromberg, J. W. Cary, T. E. Cleveland, Broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity in vitro of the synthetic peptide D4E1, J. Agric. Food Chem., 49 (2001) 2799-2803. [19] K. Rajasekaran, J. W. Cary, J. M. Jaynes, T. E. Cleveland, Disease resistance conferred by the expression of a gene encoding a synthetic peptide in transgenic cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) plants, Plant Biotechnol. J., 3 (2005) 545-554. [20] K. Rajasekaran, J. W. Cary, J. J. M., E. Montesinos, Small Wonders: Peptides for Disease Control, American Chemical Society Symposium Series 1095, Washington, D C, 2012. [21] J. M. Stewart, C. A. Nader, K. Rajasekaran, Effect of antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) on mycorrhizal associations, AAES Research Series, 562 (2007) 163-166. [22] M. O'Callaghan, E. M. Gerard, N. W. Waipara, S. D. Young, T. R. Glare, P. J. Barrell, A. J. Conner, Microbial communities of Solanum tuberosum and magainin-producing transgenic lines, Plant Soil, 266 (2004) 47-56. [23] M. Schubert, M. Houdelet, K. H. Kogel, R. Fischer, S. Schillberg, G. Nolke, Thanatin confers partial resistance against aflatoxigenic fungi in maize (Zea mays), Transgenic Res., 24 (2015) 885-895. [24] Z. Y. Chen, K. Rajasekaran, R. L. Brown, R. J. Sayler, D. Bhatnagar, Discovery and confirmation of genes/proteins associated with maize aflatoxin resistance, World Mycotoxin Journal, 8 (2015) 211-224. [25] T. Miyata, F. Tokunaga, T. Yoneya, K. Yoshikawa, S. Iwanaga, M. Niwa, T. Takao, Y. Shimonishi, Antimicrobial Peptides, Isolated from Horseshoe Crab Hemocytes, Tachyplesin II, and Polyphemusins I and II: Chemical Structures and Biological Activity, Journal of Biochemistry, 106 (1989) 663-668. [26] G. Wang, X. Li, Z. Wang, APD3: the antimicrobial peptide database as a tool for research and education, Nucleic Acids Res., 44 (2016) D1087-1093. [27] K. McGinnis, V. Chandler, K. Cone, H. Kaeppler, S. Kaeppler, A. Kerschen, C. Pikaard, E. Richards, L. Sidorenko, T. Smith, N. Springer, T. Wulan, Transgene induced RNA interference as a tool for plant functional genomics, Methods Enzymol., 392 (2005) 1-24. [28] J. C. Rogers, Two barley alpha-amylase gene families are regulated differently in aleurone cells, J. Biol. Chem., 260 (1985) 3731-3738. [29] B. Frame, M. Main, R. Schick, K. Wang, Genetic transformation using maize immature zygotic embryos, in: Methods Mol Biol, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, Clifton, N.J., 2011, pp. 327-341. [30] K. Rajasekaran, R. Majumdar, C. Sickler, Q. Wei, J. Cary, D. Bhatnagar, Fidelity of a simple Liberty leaf-painting assay to validate transgenic maize plants expressing the selectable marker gene, bar, Journal of Crop Improvement, 31 (2017) 628-636. [31] K. Rajasekaran, C. M. Sickler, R. L. Brown, J. W. Cary, D. Bhatnagar, Evaluation of resistance to aflatoxin contamination in kernels of maize genotypes using a GFP-expressing Aspergillus flavus strain World Mycotoxin Journal, 6 (2013) 151-158. [32] X. Shu, D. P. Livingston, R. G. Franks, R. S. Boston, C. P. Woloshuk, G. A. Payne, Tissue-specific gene expression in maize seeds during colonization by Aspergillus flavus and Fusarium verticillioides, Mol. Plant Pathol., 16 (2015) 662-674. [33] K. Rajasekaran, J. W. Cary, P. J. Cotty, T. E. Cleveland, Development of a GFP-expressing Aspergillus flavus strain to study fungal invasion, colonization, and resistance in cottonseed, Mycopathologia, 165 (2008) 89-97. [34] R. L. Brown, P. J. Cotty, T. E. Cleveland, N. W. Widstrom, Living maize embryo influences accumulation of aflatoxin in maize kernels, J Food Protect, 56 (1993) 967-971. [35] K. Rajasekaran, J. M. Jaynes, J. W. Cary, Transgenic expression of lytic peptides in food and feed crops to control phytopathogens and preharvest mycotoxin contamination, in: M. Appell, Kendra, D. F., Trucksess, M. W. (Ed.) Mycotoxin Prevention and Control in Agriculture, American Chemical Society, 2009, pp. 119-142. [36] L. D. Owens, T. M. Heutte, A single amino acid substitution in the antimicrobial defense protein cecropin b is associated with diminished degradation by leaf intercellular fluid, Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact., 10 (1997) 525-528. [37] Q. Liu, J. Ingersoll, L. Owens, S. Salih, R. Meng, F. Hammerschlag, Response of transgenic Royal Gala apple (Malus×domestica Borkh.) shoots carrying a modified cecropin MB39 gene, to Erwinia amylovora, Plant Cell Rep., 20 (2001) 306-312. [38] A. Chakrabarti, T. R. Ganapathi, P. K. Mukherjee, V. A. Bapat, MSI-99, a magainin analogue, imparts enhanced disease resistance in transgenic tobacco and banana, Planta, 216 (2003) 587-596. [39] K. Kamo, D. Lakshman, G. Bauchan, K. Rajasekaran, J. Cary, J. Jaynes, Expression of a synthetic antimicrobial peptide, D4E1, in Gladiolus plants for resistance to Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. gladioli, Plant Cell Tiss Organ Cult, 121 (2015) 459-467. [40] L. C. Mejia, M. J. Guiltinan, Z. Shi, L. Landherr, S. N. Maximova, Expression of designed antimicrobial peptides in Theobroma cacao L. trees reduces leaf necrosis caused by Phytophthora spp., in: K. Rajasekaran, J. W. Cary, J. Jaynes, M., E. Montesinos (Eds.) Small Wonders: Peptides for Disease Control, American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C., 2012, pp. 379-395. [41] J. M. Jaynes, G. C. Bernard, Structure/Function Link Between Cytokine Domains and Natural and Designed Lytic Peptides: Medical Promise, in: K. Rajasekaran, J. W. Cary, J. M. Jaynes, E. Montesinos (Eds.) Small Wonders: Peptides for Disease Control, American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C., 2012, pp. 21-45. [42] B. Dekruijff, Cholesterol as target for toxins, Biosci Rep, 10 (1990) 127-130. [43] S. E. Blondelle, R. A. Houghten, Hemolytic and antimicrobial activities of the twenty-four individual omission analogues of melittin, Biochemistry, 30 (1991) 4671-4678. [44] J. D. F. Hale, R. E. W. Hancock, Alternative mechanisms of action of cationic antimicrobial peptides on bacteria, Expert Review of Anti-infective Therapy, 5 (2007) 951-959. [45] M. Rahnamaeian, Antimicrobial peptides, Plant Signaling & Behavior, 6 (2014) 1325-1332. [46] R. Mentag, M. Luckevich, M. J. Morency, A. Seguin, Bacterial disease resistance of transgenic hybrid poplar expressing the synthetic antimicrobial peptide D4E1, Tree Physiology, 23 (2003) 405-411. [47] G. DeGray, K. Rajasekaran, F. Smith, J. Sanford, H. Daniell, Expression of an antimicrobial peptide via the chloroplast genome to control phytopathogenic bacteria and fungi, Plant Physiol., 127 (2001) 852-862. [48] A. Koch, W. Khalifa, G. Langen, A. Vilcinskas, K.-H. Kogel, J. Imani, The antimicrobial peptide thanatin reduces fungal infections in Arabidopsis, J. Phytopathol., 160 (2012) 606-610. [49] R. Bedre, K. Rajasekaran, V. R. Mangu, L. E. Sanchez Timm, D. Bhatnagar, N. Baisakh, Genome-wide transcriptome analysis of cotton Gossypium hirsutum L.) identifies candidate gene signatures in response to aflatoxin producing fungus Aspergillus flavus, PLoS ONE, 10 (2015) e0138025. [50] W. P. Williams, M. D. Krakowsky, B. T. Scully, R. L. Brown, A. Menkir, M. L. Warburton, G. L. Windham, Identifying and developing maize germplasm with resistance to accumulation of aflatoxins, World Mycotoxin Journal, 8 (2015) 193-209. [51] Anonymous, The Value of Proactive Mycotoxin Prevention in the Age of the Food Safety Modernization Act—a White Paper, in, Vicam, Waters Corporation, 2017, pp. 8. [52] J. Gressel, G. Polturak, Suppressing aflatoxin biosynthesis is not a breakthrough if not useful—a perspective, Pest Manage. Sci., 74 (2018) 17-21. [53] J. O. Masanga, J. M. Matheka, R. A. Omer, S. C. Ommeh, E. O. Monda, A. E. Alakonya, Downregulation of transcription factor aflR in Aspergillus flavus confers reduction to aflatoxin accumulation in transgenic maize with alteration of host plant architecture, Plant Cell Rep., 34 (2015) 1379-1387. [54] R. Majumdar, K. Rajasekaran, J. W. Cary, RNA Interference (RNAi) as a potential tool for control of mycotoxin contamination in crop plants: Concepts and considerations, Frontiers in Plant Science, 8 (2017). [55] D. Thakare, J. Zhang, R. A. Wing, P. J. Cotty, M. A. Schmidt, Aflatoxin-free transgenic maize using host-induced gene silencing, Science Advances, 3 (2017) 1-8. [56] P. Bhatnagar-Mathur, S. Sunkara, M. Bhatnagar-Panwar, F. Waliyar, K. K. Sharma, Biotechnological advances for combating Aspergillus flavus and aflatoxin contamination in crops, Plant Sci., 234 (2015) 119-132. [57] P. J. Cotty, Method for the control or prevention of aflatoxin contamination using a non-toxigenic strain of Aspergillus flavus, in: U.S. Pat. No. 5,294,442, USA, 1994. [58] G. P. Munkvold, Cultural and genetic approaches to managing mycotoxins in maize, Annu. Rev. Phytopathol., 41 (2003) 99-116.