Effector proteins remain a central focus in understanding oomycete virulence. While the classical view emphasizes secreted effectors such as RxLRs, CRNs, elicitins and NLP toxins. In the present study, the framework was expanded by examining transcriptional regulation of both secreted and non-secreted proteins with potential roles in virulence (Kamoun 2006; Liu et al. 2014; Dulal and Wilson 2024). Among genes carrying signal peptides with globular domains (SP + Glob), Phytophthora infestans (3.4%) and Phytophthora sojae (1.7%) exhibited the highest proportions of putative secreted effectors, while Pythium ultimum (syn. Globisporangium ultimum) displayed the lowest (0.3%). This subset likely represents the most probable “true effectors” that directly engage host targets.
Importantly, across all five species, a consistently small yet notable fraction of non-secreted effector-encoding genes (~ 4.6–7.3%) was also identified (Fig. 2a). These non-secreted candidates are particularly intriguing, as their promoter architectures and amino acid compositions resembled those of validated effectors more than those of secreted orthologs. This convergence suggests that non-secreted proteins may represent an underexplored component of oomycete pathogenicity, potentially acting via unconventional secretion pathways or conserved effector-like regulatory programs.
In a study, G. ultimum showed minimal classical RXLR and Crinkler content, reflecting distinct evolutionary pressures in this necrotrophic oomycete (Lévesque et al. 2010). Downstream analyses revealed lineage-specific conservation of RXLR domains, which were absent in G. ultimum, suggesting that this typical effector group was either lost during evolution or had not yet evolved in this species (File S1). Using high-confidence effector predictions across five species, this study uncovered regulatory motifs that are significantly enriched in the promoter regions of secreted effectors. These included canonical elements such as TATA-box and Inr + FPR, as well as stress-responsive motifs bound by C2H2 zinc finger, bZIP, MYB, AP2/ERF and homeodomain TFs. In addition, motifs such as CREB-like, G-box and W-box were frequently identified across orthologous effector clusters, suggesting conserved regulatory circuits (File S1). Strikingly, the promoter motif architecture of Py. ultimum non-secreted genes showed positional overlaps with validated effectors: motifs at ~ 100–150 bp upstream resembled the canonical effector-associated signatures (Fig. 5a–b), and additional enrichments were observed at ~ 350 bp and 400–450 bp, aligning with validated effector motifs. This positional concordance suggests that despite lacking classical RXLR/CRN repertoires, Py. ultimum retains effector-like regulatory programs that may contribute to its pathogenic strategy.
Promoter architectures of structural genes, those not directly classified as effectors, exhibited features consistent with steady-state expression, including enrichment of CCAAT- and other repetitive motifs commonly linked to metabolic regulation. Several structural proteins involved in essential cellular processes (such as RNA polymerase subunits, proteasome components, ribosomal proteins) carried highly conserved, motif-rich promoter regions across all species. While these genes are unlikely to function as effectors, their conserved promoter complexity suggests that distinct cis-elements govern the regulation of different protein classes, reflecting the need for tight control of both pathogenicity-related and housekeeping functions (Fig. 4b).
In the current study, secreted proteins retained canonical signal peptide features, non-secreted orthologs displayed amino acid composition patterns and promoter motif architectures that were more similar to validated effectors than to secreted genes. This convergence at both the protein and regulatory levels suggests that non-secreted orthologs may share effector-like properties, potentially reflecting unconventional secretion or conserved regulatory programs for host interaction. This further emphasizes the need to re-evaluate effector prediction frameworks, incorporating regulatory architecture alongside protein features.
Cysteine-rich profiles are often linked to effector functionality, especially in fungal pathogens, where cysteine content enhances stability, structural specificity and resistance to plant defenses. Fungal effectors typically exceed four cysteine residues, while oomycete effectors have lower counts, with nearly 36% being devoid of cysteines altogether (Stergiopoulos and de Wit 2009; Sperschneider et al. 2016). Notably, no major differences in cysteine richness were observed between oomycete proteomes and validated effectors, with the exception of G. ultimum. This indicates that cysteine content is not a reliable discriminator of pathogenic function across oomycetes with diverse lifestyles.
Overall, this study advances the understanding of effector regulation by providing a systematic, motif-level view of oomycete promoter architectures. The identification of conserved regulatory elements provides valuable leads for functional characterization of master regulators and offers potential targets for broad-spectrum pathogen control. These findings highlight positional conservation as a regulatory layer for effector gene expression.