First published online June 12, 2003; 10.1104/pp.103.022970
Plant Physiology 132:1370-1381 (2003)
© 2003 American Society of Plant Biologists
PLANTS INTERACTING WITH OTHER ORGANISMS
Regulation of Arabidopsis COPINE 1 Gene Expression in Response to Pathogens and Abiotic Stimuli1
Niranjani Jambunathan and
Timothy W. McNellis*
Department of Plant Pathology and Intercollege Graduate Program in Plant
Physiology, 212 Buckhout Laboratory, Pennsylvania State University, University
Park, Pennsylvania 16802
 |
ABSTRACT
|
|---|
The copines are a widely distributed class of calcium-dependent,
phospholipid-binding proteins of undetermined biological function. Mutation of
the Arabidopsis CPN1 (COPINE 1) gene causes a
humidity-sensitive lesion mimic phenotype with increased resistance to a
bacterial and an oomyceteous pathogen, constitutive
pathogenesis-related gene expression, and an accelerated
hypersensitive cell death defense response. Here, we show that the disease
resistance phenotype of the cpn1-1 mutant was also temperature
sensitive, demonstrate increased CPN1 gene transcript accumulation in
wild-type plants under low-humidity conditions, and present a detailed
analysis of CPN1 gene transcript accumulation in response to
bacterial pathogens. In wild-type plants, CPN1 transcript
accumulation was rapidly, locally, and transiently induced by both avirulent
and virulent strains of Pseudomonas syringae pv tomato
bacteria. However, induction of CPN1 transcript accumulation by
avirulent bacteria was much faster and stronger than that induced by virulent
bacteria. Bacterial induction of CPN1 transcript accumulation was
dependent on a functional type III bacterial protein secretion system. In
planta expression of the avrRpt2 avirulence gene was sufficient to
trigger rapid CPN1 transcript accumulation. CPN1 transcript
accumulation was induced by salicylic acid treatment but was not observed
during lesion formation in the lesion mimic mutants lsd1 and
lsd5. These results are consistent with CPN1 playing a role
in plant disease resistance responses, possibly as a suppressor of defense
responses including the hypersensitive cell death defense response. The
results also suggest that CPN1 may represent a link between plant
disease resistance and plant acclimation to low-humidity and low-temperature
conditions.
The copines are a class of highly conserved proteins present in organisms
ranging from protozoans to complex forms such as mouse (Mus
musculus), human (Homo sapiens), and higher plants
(Creutz et al., 1998 ). These
proteins are named copine (the French feminine noun meaning
"friend") because of their tight association with lipid membranes
(Creutz et al., 1998 ). The
identifying feature of copine proteins is the unique combination of two
protein kinase C conserved 2 (C2) domains in the N-terminal region and a von
Willebrand A (VWA) domain in the C-terminal region. The C2 domain is a widely
distributed protein motif that often has Ca2+-dependent
membrane lipid-binding activity (Xu et
al., 1997 ). C2 domain-containing proteins include protein kinase C
(Azzi et al., 1992 ),
phospholipase C (Essen et al.,
1996 ), synaptotagmin (Brose et
al., 1995 ), and rabphilin
(Wang et al., 2000 ). The VWA
domain is another widely distributed protein motif that is involved in
mediating protein-protein interactions in a range of extracellular and
intracellular proteins (Whittaker and
Hynes, 2002 ). Although several biochemical studies of copines have
revealed that they have a calcium-dependent phospholipid-binding activity
(Creutz et al., 1998 ;
Tomsig and Creutz, 2000 ), no
specific biological functions for any copines have been defined.
Previously, we conducted a genetic screen to identify Arabidopsis mutants
with increased resistance to virulent Pseudomonas syringae pv
tomato (P. s. t.) bacteria
(Jambunathan et al., 2001 ).
One of the mutants identified from our screen was the cpn1-1 mutant,
a recessive, T-DNA insertion mutant of the CPN1 gene, which encodes a
copine-like protein (GenBank accession nos. AY045764 and AY045765). The
cpn1-1 mutant exhibits a strict humidity-dependent lesion mimic
phenotype: cpn1-1 plants grown under low-humidity (LH) conditions
(35%45% relative humidity [RH]) are small in size and have curled
leaves, minute lesions at the leaf margins, dramatically increased resistance
to virulent P. s. t. and Peronospora parasitica strains, and
display constitutive PR gene expression. In contrast, cpn1-1
plants grown under high humidity (HH; 75%85% RH) conditions are
morphologically indistinguishable from wild-type (WT) plants and no longer
exhibit increased resistance to virulent P. s. t. bacteria. However,
both LH- and HH-grown cpn1-1 mutant plants have an accelerated
hypersensitive cell death defense response (HR) compared with WT plants after
avirulent bacterial inoculation. We hypothesized that the CPN1 gene
product could act as a mediator of plant acclimation to LH or, alternatively,
as a suppressor of defense-related cell death and defense responses
(Jambunathan et al., 2001 ).
Hua et al. (2001 ) isolated
mutants with T-DNA insertions at the same locus, characterized the mutants as
temperature-sensitive dwarf plants, and named the corresponding gene
BON1 (BONZAI 1). The bon1 mutants exhibited a dwarf
phenotype under low-temperature (LT) conditions (22°C) but grew in a
manner similar to WT plants when grown under high-temperature (HT; 28°C)
conditions. Hua et al. (2001 )
hypothesized that the BON1 gene product could be a regulator of
growth homeostasis under LT conditions.
Environmental conditions such as light intensity, day length, RH, and
temperature play key roles in the growth and development of most plants. The
ability of the plant to acclimate to environmental stress conditions is
essential for normal plant development. For example, loss of plant acclimation
to LT in mutants such as asculis1, asculis3, and asculis4 in
Arabidopsis leads to a defect in leaf expansion and stem elongation
(Tsukaya et al., 1993 ;
Akamatsu et al., 1999 ). One of
the major ways that plants respond to the environment is at the level of gene
transcription. In many instances, genes involved in controlling the plant
response to a particular stress are induced at the transcriptional level.
Members of the cold-responsive transcription factor family CBF/DREB1 are
induced within 15 min of cold treatment
(Gilmour et al., 1998 ;
Liu et al., 1998 ), and
transgenic plants overexpressing CBF/DREB1 transcription factors exhibit
accumulation of solutes with cryoprotective activity and increased freezing
tolerance (Gilmour et al.,
2000 ). Several genes known to be key regulators of plant defense
responses are transcriptionally regulated by pathogen infection. Important
plant defense signaling genes such as NDR1 (NON-RACE-SPECIFIC
DISEASE RESISTANCE 1; Century et al.,
1997 ), EDS1 (ENHANCED DISEASE SUSCEPTIBILITY 1;
Falk et al., 1999 ),
EDS5 (Nawrath et al.,
2002 ), and PAD4 (PHYTOALEXIN DEFICIENT 4;
Jirage et al., 1999 ) are
rapidly induced by pathogen attack.
These genes are part of a complex signaling network that allows the plant
to recognize and protect itself against pathogens and environmental stress.
Plant interactions with pathogens may culminate in either disease
susceptibility or resistance in the plant. In the case of resistance, the
plant is able to recognize quickly the presence of the pathogen and mount
appropriate defense responses. In contrast, during pathogenesis, pathogen
recognition by the plant is delayed or nonexistent, and the defense responses
are slower, less pronounced, and largely ineffective. Some of the early events
after pathogen recognition by the plant include an inward flux of
Ca2+ and H+ and an outward flux of
K+ and Cl
(Hahlbrock et al., 1995 ;
Levine et al., 1996 ;
Yang et al., 1997 ;
Schaller and Oecking, 1999 ),
the activation of a plasma membrane-associated NADPH-oxidase complex leading
to production of reactive oxygen intermediates
(Bolwell, 1999 ), and the
initiation of the HR (Klement et al.,
1964 ). These early events, in turn, lead to a state of increased
disease resistance in the whole plant known as systemic acquired resistance
(SAR), which is marked by high levels of PR gene expression and
elevated levels of salicylic acid (SA;
Malamy et al., 1990 ;
Uknes et al., 1992 ).
Mutational analysis has lead to the identification of a number of genes
that participate in plant defense signaling. A number of Arabidopsis mutants
have been identified that lack the ability to express effective defense
responses, including ndr1, eds5, and npr1. NDR1, a small
membrane-associated protein, is involved in signal transduction of the
coiled-coil, nucleotide-binding, Leu-rich repeat class disease resistance
proteins (Century et al.,
1995 ,
1997 ;
Aarts et al., 1998 ). EDS5, a
membrane protein with homology to multidrug and toxin extrusion transporters,
is important for the accumulation of SA during defense
(Nawrath et al., 2002 ).
Downstream of SA signaling, NPR1 is a novel protein with ankyrin repeats that
is important in the induction of pathogenesis-related (PR)
genes such as PR1, PR2, and PR5 (Cao et al.,
1994 ,
1997 ).
At the other extreme are the lesion mimic mutants, which display
spontaneous cell death and often develop SAR. Lesion mimic mutants in
Arabidopsis include lsd1 to lsd7, acd1, acd2, acd6, cpr5,
and cpr22 (Greenberg and Ausubel,
1993 ; Dietrich et al.,
1994 ; Greenberg et al.,
1994 ; Weymann et al.,
1995 ; Bowling et al.,
1997 ; Dietrich et al.,
1997 ; Rate et al.,
1999 ; Yoshioka et al.,
2001 ). Lesion formation in many lesion mimic mutants is dependent
on environmental factors, such as light, day length, and RH
(Dietrich et al., 1994 ;
Chamnongpol et al., 1996 ;
Jambunathan et al., 2001 ;
Yoshioka et al., 2001 ). At
least some of these lesion mimic mutants may represent suppressors of plant
defenses, including the HR. However, it is possible that many lesion mimic
mutants may represent genes that are not necessarily directly involved in
plant defense because perturbations of cellular physiology apparently
unrelated to disease resistance can result in cell death and SAR
(Mock et al., 1999 ;
Molina et al., 1999 ). In
addition, a number of mutants that exhibit constitutive SAR in the absence of
spontaneous cell death have also been identified, such as cpr1, cpr6,
and mpk4 (Bowling et al.,
1994 ; Clarke et al.,
1998 ; Petersen et al.,
2000 ).
In this report, we extend our previous results by carrying out additional
characterization of the cpn1-1 mutant phenotype and analyzing the
expression pattern of the CPN1 gene in WT plants in response to
temperature, humidity, and pathogen stimuli. Our results indicate that the
cpn1-1 lesion mimic phenotype is dependent on both temperature and
humidity and that the expression of the CPN1 gene is induced by LH,
LT, and pathogen stimulus. Because pathogen-derived signals appeared to be the
most effective inducers of CPN1 gene expression, we performed a
comprehensive analysis of bacterial pathogen-induced CPN1 gene
expression patterns. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that
CPN1 is involved in plant disease resistance responses, possibly as a
suppressor of plant defense responses.
 |
RESULTS
|
|---|
The cpn1-1 Lesion Mimic, Increased Disease Resistance, and
PR Gene Expression Phenotypes Are Temperature Sensitive
We initially identified the cpn1-1 mutant as a humidity-sensitive
lesion mimic mutant (Jambunathan et al.,
2001 ). However, mutants in the BON1 gene, which
corresponds to CPN1, were identified as temperature-dependent dwarf
mutants that had a mutant phenotype when grown at 22°C or lower
(Hua et al., 2001 ). Therefore,
we sought to determine whether or not the cpn1-1 lesion mimic
phenotype was temperature sensitive and humidity-sensitive. cpn1-1
plants grown at LT (21°C ± 0.5°C) under HH, short-day (SD)
conditions (8 h of light/16 h of darkness) developed minute lesions at the
leaf margins after 2 to 3 weeks of growth
(Fig. 1, B and C). Columbia-0
(Col-0) ecotype WT plants grown under the same conditions did not display any
lesions (Fig. 1A). For the
first 1 to 2 weeks of growth under LT, HH conditions, the cpn1-1
plants were indistinguishable from the WT plants. With the onset of lesion
development after the 2nd week, cpn1-1 plants appeared somewhat
stunted compared with WT plants. The lesions appeared consistently in all
cpn1-1 plants in the absence of any pathogen. However, the lesion
mimic phenotype of cpn1-1 under LT, HH conditions did not appear to
be as strong as the phenotype of cpn1-1 grown in LH conditions. The
leaves of LT-, HH-grown cpn1-1 plants did not display epinastic
curling as severe as that observed for the leaves of cpn1-1 grown
under LH, HT (24.5°C ± 0.5°C) conditions
(Jambunathan et al., 2001 ;
data not shown). cpn1-1 plants grown under HH, HT conditions were
morphologically indistinguishable from the WT plants, with normal leaves and
no lesions or dwarfing evident
(Jambunathan et al., 2001 ;
data not shown).

View larger version (35K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1. Temperature-dependent lesion mimic, increased disease resistance, and
PR gene expression phenotypes of cpn1-1. A, Five-week-old WT
plant grown under LT, HH, SD conditions. B, Five-week-old cpn1-1
mutant plant grown under LT, HH, SD conditions. C, Close-up view of lesions on
leaves of a 5-week-old cpn1-1 mutant plant grown under LT, HH, SD
conditions. Arrows in B and C indicate lesion locations. D, Growth of virulent
P. s. t. DC3000 bacteria and avirulent P. s. t. DC3000
(avrRpt2) bacteria in WT and cpn1-1 plants grown under LT,
HH, SD conditions. Plant leaves were infiltrated with a bacterial suspension
at a concentration of 1 x 105 colony forming units (cfu)
mL1. Bacterial populations were monitored on d 0
and 3 postinoculation. Bars = SE. Asterisks, Significantly lower
bacterial populations in cpn1-1 as compared with the corresponding WT
plants according to a Student's t test (two-sample Student's
t test assuming unequal variances). E, RNA gel-blot analyses of
PR1, PR2, and PR5 transcript levels in
cpn1-1 mutant (M) and WT (W) plants grown under three different
environmental conditions: LH, HT; HH, HT; and HH, LT. rRNA, 28S rRNA stained
with methylene blue to show relative amount of RNA in each lane.
|
|
Because cpn1-1 mutant plants grown under LH conditions had
increased resistance to P. s. t.
(Jambunathan et al., 2001 ), we
reasoned that LT-grown cpn1-1 mutant plants might also have increased
resistance to P. s. t. bacteria. Growth of virulent P. s. t.
strain DC3000 bacteria was monitored in leaves of LT-grown cpn1-1 and
WT plants on d 0 and 3 after infiltration with the bacteria. The growth of
virulent P. s. t. DC3000 bacteria was reduced by more than 10-fold in
LT-grown cpn1-1 mutant plants when compared with LT-grown WT plants
(Fig. 1D). In addition,
bacterial speck disease symptoms were very weak in LT-grown cpn1-1
plants compared with WT plants (data not shown). The restriction of virulent
bacterial growth in LT-grown cpn1-1 was similar to the restriction of
the growth of avirulent P. s. t. DC3000 bacteria carrying the
avrRpt2 avirulence gene (P. s. t. DC3000 [avrRpt2])
in WT plants (Fig. 1D). This
indicates that the level of resistance to virulent P. s. t. bacteria
observed in LT-grown cpn1-1 mutant plants was as strong as
gene-for-gene resistance in WT plants to avirulent P. s. t. DC3000
(avrRpt2) bacteria mediated by the RPS2 R gene
(Whalen et al., 1991 ;
Bent et al., 1994 ;
Mindrinos et al., 1994 ). The
growth of avirulent P. s. t. DC3000 (avrRpt2) bacteria was
even more strongly restricted in LT-grown cpn1-1 plants compared with
the WT (Fig. 1D). Because the
cpn1-1 mutant has a functional RPS2 disease resistance gene
(Jambunathan et al., 2001 ),
this indicates that the cpn1-1 mutation has a partially additive
effect with the function of RPS2 in mediating resistance to P. s.
t. DC3000 (avrRpt2) bacteria.
In previous work (Jambunathan et al.,
2001 ), we observed that LH-grown cpn1-1 plants accumulate
high levels of PR gene transcripts. Because LT conditions also
triggered the lesion mimic and increased disease resistance phenotypes of
cpn1-1, we also examined PR gene transcript accumulation in
LT-grown cpn1-1 plants. PR1, PR2, and PR5 gene
transcripts accumulated to high levels in uninoculated, LT-grown
cpn1-1 plants (Fig.
1E). LT- and LH-grown cpn1-1 plants showed similar
patterns of PR1, PR2, and PR5 transcript accumulation. Very
low levels of PR1, PR2, and PR5 gene transcript accumulation
were seen in HH-, HT-grown cpn1-1 plants. Taken together, these
results indicate that the lesion mimic, increased disease resistance, and
PR gene expression phenotypes of cpn1-1 are both humidity
and temperature sensitive.
Humidity- and Temperature-Dependent CPN1 Transcript
Accumulation
Hua et al. (2001 ) observed
that the BON1 (CPN1) transcript level in WT plants is
regulated by temperature conditions. Higher levels of BON1 expression
were observed when plants were moved from higher to lower temperature. Because
both LH and LT conditions triggered a lesion mimic phenotype in
cpn1-1, we tested whether both of these conditions influenced the
accumulation of CPN1 transcript in WT plants. WT plants grown under
LH, HT or HH, LT conditions showed increased accumulation of CPN1
transcript when compared with WT plants grown under HH, HT conditions
(Fig. 2). In cpn1-1
plants, there was no detectable CPN1 transcript under any of the
conditions tested. Overall, the CPN1 gene appeared to be expressed at
low levels, and the CPN1 transcript was difficult to detect.

View larger version (63K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 2. Effects of temperature and humidity on CPN1 transcript
accumulation. RNA gel-blot analysis of CPN1 transcript accumulation
in WT (Col-0) and cpn1-1 mutant plants grown under three different
environmental conditions: LH, HT; HH, HT; and HH, LT. Five-week-old, SD-grown
plants were used. rRNA, 28S rRNA stained with methylene blue to show the
relative amount of RNA in each lane. For details, see "Materials and
Methods."
|
|
The CPN1 Transcript Accumulates in Response to Both Virulent
and Avirulent Bacteria
The lesion mimic, accelerated hypersensitive cell death, and increased
disease resistance phenotypes of the cpn1-1 mutant suggest that the
CPN1 gene may play a role in plant pathogen defense signal
transduction, possibly as a repressor of cell death and other defense
functions (Jambunathan et al.,
2001 ). Therefore, we speculated that CPN1 gene transcript
accumulation might be pathogen regulated. CPN1 transcript
accumulation was monitored in LT-, LH-grown WT plants inoculated with virulent
and avirulent strains of P. s. t. CPN1 transcript accumulation was
monitored both in the inoculated leaves and in distal, uninoculated leaves to
test for systemic induction of CPN1 transcript accumulation. In the
inoculated leaves, CPN1 transcript accumulation was strongly induced
at 24 h after infiltration with virulent P. s. t. DC3000 bacteria and
avirulent strains of P. s. t. DC3000 carrying either the
avrRpt2 or the avrRpm1 avirulence gene
(Fig. 3). In the distal,
uninoculated tissues, no induction of CPN1 was detected at 24 h after
inoculation with virulent P. s. t. DC3000 bacteria and avirulent
P. s. t. DC3000 (avrRpt2) bacteria. However, a very slight
induction of CPN1 transcript accumulation in distal tissues was
detected 24 h after inoculation with avirulent P. s. t. DC3000
(avrRpm1). Mock inoculation did not induce CPN1 transcript
accumulation, indicating that bacteria were required for induction. It should
be noted that the induction of CPN1 transcript accumulation by P.
s. t. DC3000 bacteria was dramatically higher than that caused by LT and
LH because the plants used in these experiments were maintained in LH, LT
conditions.

View larger version (56K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 3. RNA gel-blot analysis of CPN1 transcript accumulation in WT plants
after bacterial inoculation. Five-week-old WT plants were either mock
inoculated with 10 mM MgCl2 or inoculated with 1 x
105 cfu mL1 of one of the following
bacterial strains by syringe infiltration of four fully expanded leaves:
P. s. t. DC3000, P. s. t. DC3000 (avrRpt2), or
P. s. t. DC3000 (avrRpm1). CPN1 transcript
accumulation was monitored at 0 and 24 h postinoculation in the inoculated
leaves and at 24 h postinoculation in uninoculated, distal leaves. 24D, RNA
sample from uninoculated, distal leaves 24 h postinoculation. rRNA, 28S rRNA
stained with methylene blue to show relative amount of RNA in each lane.
|
|
To determine the timing of CPN1 transcript accumulation in
inoculated leaves after bacterial inoculation, a time course experiment was
performed. Avirulent P. s. t. DC3000 (avrRpt2) bacteria
triggered increased CPN1 transcript accumulation as early as 4 h
after inoculation and reached a peak at 6 h
(Fig. 4A). The level of
CPN1 transcript slowly decreased thereafter, and between 36 and 48 h,
it returned to the basal level. The plants used for this experiment were grown
under LT, LH conditions; therefore, the induction of CPN1 transcript
accumulation by P. s. t. DC3000 (avrRpt2) bacterial
inoculation was substantially higher than that induced by LT or LH. Prolonged
autoradiographic exposure of the RNA gel blot in this experiment allowed
detection of CPN1 transcript in all lanes but resulted in the
overexposure of the induced time points. To gauge the rapidity of
CPN1 transcript accumulation relative to a known pathogen-inducible
gene, we compared the induction time course of CPN1 transcript
accumulation with that of PR1. The onset of CPN1 transcript
accumulation occurred 5 h earlier than the onset of PR1 expression
after inoculation with P. s. t. DC3000 (avrRpt2;
Fig. 4A). PR1
transcript accumulation reached a peak at 36 h after inoculation and then
decreased but remained elevated until the end of the time course at 72 h.
These results indicated that CPN1 transcript accumulated rapidly and
transiently after inoculation with avirulent P. s. t. DC3000
(avrRpt2) bacteria.

View larger version (80K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 4. Time course of CPN1 transcript accumulation after bacterial
inoculation. A, RNA gel-blot analysis of the time course of CPN1
transcript accumulation after inoculation with avirulent P. s. t.
DC3000 (avrRpt2) bacteria. Leaves of 5-week-old WT plants were
syringe inoculated with 1 x 105 cfu
mL1 of P. s. t. DC3000
(avrRpt2) bacteria, and RNA samples were extracted from inoculated
leaves at 0, 2, 4, 6, 9, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 72 h postinoculation.
PR1, Same blot reprobed with a PR1 gene-specific probe.
Mock, RNA samples from leaves inoculated with 10 mM
MgCl2 at 0 and 24 h postinoculation. rRNA, 28S rRNA stained with
methylene blue to show relative amounts of RNA in each lane. B, RNA gel-blot
analysis of the time course of CPN1 transcript accumulation after
inoculation with virulent P. s. t. DC3000 bacteria. This experiment
was performed in a manner identical to that described in A.
|
|
The time course of CPN1 transcript accumulation in response to
inoculation with virulent P. s. t. DC3000 bacteria was also
determined (Fig. 4B). The
timing of CPN1 transcript accumulation in leaves inoculated with
virulent P. s. t. DC3000 was different and slower than that observed
after inoculation with avirulent P. s. t. DC3000 (avrRpt2).
For these experiments, plants were grown under LH, LT conditions. Induction of
CPN1 transcript accumulation was observed at 24 h after inoculation,
with peak levels occurring at 36 h postinoculation. By 48 h after inoculation,
CPN1 transcript accumulation decreased nearly to the basal level.
Severe bacterial speck disease symptoms developed by 72 to 96 h after
inoculation. By way of comparison, the timing of PR1 gene transcript
accumulation was monitored in leaves inoculated with virulent P. s.
t. DC3000. The PR1 gene transcript became detectable at 24 h
postinoculation and reached a peak at 36 h after inoculation. The timing of
CPN1 gene transcript accumulation after virulent P. s. t.
DC3000 inoculation was similar to that of PR1, except that the
PR1 transcript remained at elevated levels until the end of the time
course at 72 h, whereas CPN1 transcript returned to near basal level
at 48 h postinoculation (Fig.
4B).
A Functional Bacterial Type III Protein Secretion System Is Required
for Bacterial Induction of CPN1 Transcript Accumulation
Many plant and animal pathogenic bacteria, including P. s. t., use
the type III protein secretion pathway to deliver some of their proteins into
the host cell during pathogenesis (for review, see
Hueck, 1998 ). In the case of
P. syringae, the type III protein secretion system is required both
for virulence on compatible host plants and for the elicitation of the HR on
incompatible host plants (He et al.,
1993 ; Alfano and Collmer,
1997 ). The bacterial genes required for pathogenicity in
susceptible plants and HR in resistant plants have been defined as
hrp (hypersensitive response and
pathogenicity) genes (Lindgren et
al., 1986 ). Hrp genes that are highly structurally
conserved across bacterial species are called hrc
(hypersensitive response and conserved;
Bogdanove et al., 1996 ). A
mutation in any of the hrp genes disables the type III protein
secretion system of the bacteria and renders them unable to cause disease or
elicit an HR.
To test whether induction of CPN1 transcript accumulation by
inoculation with P. s. t. strains depended on the type III protein
secretion system, we monitored CPN1 transcript accumulation in WT
plants inoculated with bacterial strains that are nonpathogenic and/or
defective in type III secretion (Fig.
5). No induction of CPN1 transcript accumulation above
basal levels was observed in leaves of WT plants 24 h after infiltration with
an hrcU mutant strain of P. s. t. DC3000
(P. s. t. DC3000 [hrcU]). The P. s.
t. DC3000 (hrcU) mutant strain is defective in
type III protein secretion and is unable to cause disease in compatible hosts
or elicit defense responses, including the HR, in incompatible host plants
(Mudgett and Staskawicz,
1999 ). Also, no induction of CPN1 transcript accumulation
above basal levels was observed in leaves of WT plants 24 h after infiltration
with nonpathogenic P. fluorescens bacteria. As expected, virulent
P. s. t. DC3000 and avirulent P. s. t. DC3000
(avrRpt2) bacteria, which have an intact type III protein secretion
system, were able to induce CPN1 transcript accumulation in
inoculated leaves at 24 h after infiltration
(Fig. 5). For comparison, we
also examined the induction of PR1 gene transcript accumulation under
the same inoculation conditions. PR1 gene transcript accumulated to
high levels in leaves inoculated with avirulent P. s. t. DC3000
(avrRpt2) bacteria and to low levels in leaves inoculated with
virulent P. s. t. DC3000 bacteria at 24 h after inoculation. Taken
together, these data indicate that CPN1 transcript accumulation was
induced specifically by pathogenic bacteria and that this induction required a
functional bacterial type III protein secretion system.

View larger version (63K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 5. Specific induction of CPN1 transcript accumulation by pathogenic
bacteria. RNA gel-blot analysis of CPN1 transcript accumulation after
inoculation with pathogenic and nonpathogenic bacterial strains. Leaves of
5-week-old WT plants were either mock inoculated with 10 mM
MgCl2 or inoculated with 1 x 105 cfu
mL1 of one of the following bacterial strains by
syringe infiltration: virulent P. s. t. DC3000, avirulent P. s.
t. DC3000 (avrRpt2), nonpathogenic Pseudomonas
fluorescens, or the nonpathogenic mutant P. s. t. DC3000
(hrcU). RNA samples were extracted from inoculated
leaves at 0 and 24 h postinoculation. PR1, Same blot reprobed with a
PR1 gene-specific probe. rRNA, 28S rRNA visualized with methylene
blue to show relative amounts of RNA in each lane.
|
|
In Planta Expression of an Avirulence Gene Is Sufficient to Induce
CPN1 Transcript Accumulation
Although CPN1 transcript accumulation occurred in response to both
virulent and avirulent bacterial inoculation, the induction was most dramatic
with avirulent P. s. t. DC3000 (avrRpt2). This suggests that
the stronger and more rapid induction of CPN1 transcript accumulation
by P. s. t. DC3000 (avrRpt2) was due to gene-for-gene
recognition of the avrRpt2 determinant by the corresponding RPS2
R gene product in the host (Leister
et al., 1996 ). To determine whether RPS2-mediated recognition of
AvrRpt2 was sufficient for induction of CPN1 transcript accumulation,
we tested whether or not glucocorticoid-inducible expression of
avrRpt2 in transgenic plants was sufficient to induce CPN1
transcript accumulation. For this experiment, we used stable transgenic
Arabidopsis lines bearing a glucocorticoid-inducible avrRpt2 gene in
either the Col-0 WT genetic background having a functional RPS2 gene
or in the rps2-101C mutant genetic background, which lacks a
functional RPS2 gene (McNellis et
al., 1998 ). Infiltration of leaves of these transgenic plants with
dexamethasone (DEX), a strong, synthetic glucocorticoid, induces the
expression of the avrRpt2 transgene. In the RPS2 (WT)
genetic background, glucocorticoid-induced avrRpt2 expression
triggers hypersensitive cell death within 12 to 24 h due to
RPS2-mediated gene-for-gene recognition of the
avrRpt2-encoded avirulence determinant. In the rps2-101C
mutant, no hypersensitive cell death occurs because gene-for-gene recognition
of the avrRpt2 avirulence determinant does not take place.
Transgenic plants with the glucocorticoid-inducible avrRpt2 gene
in the RPS2 genetic background exhibited strong induction of
CPN1 transcript accumulation as early as 3 h after DEX infiltration
(Fig. 6). The levels of
CPN1 transcript decreased slowly after a peak at 3 until 12 h
postinfiltration, at which time the leaves showed near complete collapse due
to hypersensitive cell death. Transgenic plants with the
glucocorticoid-inducible avrRpt2 transgene in the rps2-101C
mutant genetic background did not exhibit induction of CPN1
transcript accumulation after DEX infiltration during the time frame tested
(Fig. 6). These results show
that in planta expression of the avrRpt2 avirulence gene was
sufficient to stimulate CPN1 transcript accumulation and that this
effect depended on the presence of a functional RPS2 gene. This
result indicates that RPS2-mediated gene-for-gene recognition of the
avrRpt2-derived avirulence determinant is sufficient to trigger
CPN1 transcript accumulation.

View larger version (54K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 6. CPN1 transcript accumulation in response to in planta expression
of avrRpt2. RNA gel-blot analysis of CPN1 transcript
accumulation in transgenic plants bearing a glucocorticoid-inducible
avrRpt2 avirulence gene over time after glucocorticoid treatment.
DEX::avrRpt2 (Col-0), Transgenic line bearing the
glucocorticoid-inducible avrRpt2 gene in the Col-0 WT genetic
background; DEX::avrRpt2 (rps2), glucocorticoid-inducible
avrRpt2 gene in the rps2-101C mutant genetic background.
Leaves of both plant lines were infiltrated with either 30 µM
DEX in 0.1% (v/v) ethanol (DEX) or 0.1% (v/v) ethanol (EtOH) as a control. RNA
samples were extracted from DEX-infiltrated leaves at 0, 3, 6, and 12 h
postinfiltration and from ethanol-infiltrated leaves at 0 and 12 h
postinoculation. rRNA, 28S rRNA visualized by methylene blue staining to show
relative amounts of RNA in each lane.
|
|
SA Stimulates CPN1 Transcript Accumulation
SA is a key chemical inducer of plant defense responses and is required for
the development of SAR (Gaffney et al.,
1993 ). Biochemical and genetic data suggest that SA can potentiate
defense responses by promoting cell death
(Weymann et al., 1995 ). SA
treatment of plants can also induce SAR and the expression of PR
genes (Ward et al., 1991 ). To
test whether SA treatment can induce the accumulation of the CPN1
gene transcript, WT Arabidopsis plants were sprayed with 1 mM SA,
and the accumulation of CPN1 transcript was monitored 24 h later. SA
treatment induced substantial accumulation of CPN1 transcript
relative to the water-treated control plants at 24 h after treatment
(Fig. 7). High-level
accumulation of PR1 transcript was also observed in SA-treated plants
but not in the water-treated controls, as expected. These results indicate
that accumulation of CPN1 gene transcript can be induced by SA.

View larger version (76K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 7. SA induction of CPN1 transcript accumulation. RNA gel-blot
analysis of CPN1 gene transcript accumulation in 5-week-old WT plants
24 h after treatment with either 1 mM SA or water. PR1,
Same blot reprobed with a PR1 gene-specific probe. rRNA, 28S rRNA
visualized with methylene blue to show relative amounts of RNA in each
lane.
|
|
CPN1 Transcript Accumulation in Other Lesion Mimic
Mutants
Conditional lesion mimic mutants such as lsd1 and lsd5
are sensitive to day length conditions. lsd1 has a non-lesion
phenotype under permissive, SD conditions. Spreading cell death in
the lsd1 mutant can be initiated by shifting the plants from
SD to long-day (LD; 16 h of light/8 h of dark) conditions
(Dietrich et al., 1994 ;
Jabs et al., 1996 ).
lsd5, another conditional mutant, initiates spreading cell death
under SD conditions, but has a non-lesion mimic phenotype under
permissive, LD conditions (Dietrich et
al., 1994 ; Morel and Dangl,
1999 ). We speculated that the day length-induced cell death in
lsd1 and lsd5 might trigger CPN1 transcript
accumulation. However, no induction of CPN1 transcript accumulation
was observed in lsd1 or lsd5 mutant plants grown under
permissive light conditions or after the mutants were shifted to nonpermissive
(lesion-inducing) conditions (Fig.
8). In contrast, PR1 transcript accumulation was strongly
induced in both mutants when grown under conditions that favored lesion
formation (Fig. 8). The
lsd1 mutant plants showed substantial PR1 transcript
accumulation even under permissive, SD conditions.

View larger version (95K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 8. RNA gel-blot analysis of CPN1 transcript accumulation in the
lsd1 and lsd5 lesion mimic mutants. CPN1 transcript
accumulation was monitored in 4-week-old lsd1 plants grown
continuously in permissive SD conditions and 48 h after transfer from SD
conditions to nonpermissive, LD conditions, at which point spreading lesions
were observed. Similarly, CPN1 transcript accumulation was monitored
in 3-week-old lsd5 mutant plants grown continuously under permissive
LD conditions and 48 h after transfer to nonpermissive, SD conditions that
triggered cell death and visible lesion formation. RNA samples from WT plants
0 and 12 h after inoculation with 1 x 105 cfu
mL1 of P. s. t. (avrRpt2)
served as a positive control. PR1, Same blot reprobed with a
PR1 gene-specific probe. rRNA, 28S rRNA visualized with methylene
blue to show relative amounts of RNA in each lane.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION
|
|---|
The results presented herein support both of our current working hypotheses
regarding the potential function of the CPN1 gene product: that CPN1
may be a mediator of plant acclimation to LH and LT conditions and a negative
regulator of defense-related cell death and other defense responses. The
recessive, temperature- and humidity-dependent lesion mimic phenotype of the
cpn1-1 mutant implies that the CPN1 gene product is required
to prevent damaging effects of or suppress inappropriate responses to LT and
LH. The increased accumulation of CPN1 transcript under LH and LT
conditions supports the potential role for CPN1 as a mediator of acclimation
to LT and LH: Increased levels of the CPN1 protein may be required to deal
with the stresses of LT and LH conditions. As a
Ca2+-dependent membrane-associated protein, CPN1 may be
involved in maintaining cellular homeostasis under LT and LH conditions by
regulating some aspect of membrane trafficking
(Hua et al., 2001 ;
Jambunathan et al., 2001 ). It
is interesting to note, however, that the LT conditions (22°C) that
trigger the cpn1-1 lesion mimic phenotype are considered optimal for
the growth of Arabidopsis, and researchers routinely grow their Arabidopsis
plants at this temperature.
The rapid, specific, and tightly regulated accumulation of CPN1
gene transcript in response to pathogen signals implies a direct role for
CPN1 in plant defense. This finding makes it unlikely that the
effects of the cpn1-1 mutation on plant defense responses are simply
due to perturbations of plant cell homeostasis unrelated to plant defense
signaling. The relatively rapid and high level of CPN1 transcript
accumulation after inoculation with avirulent P. s. t. DC3000
(avrRpt2) bacteria as compared with that observed with virulent
P. s. t. DC3000 bacteria (Fig.
4) indicated that RPS2-mediated recognition of the
avrRpt2 signal triggered the rapid accumulation of CPN1
transcript. It is not unusual for pathogen-induced genes to be induced by both
virulent and avirulent pathogens, although induction by avirulent pathogens is
generally much stronger and more rapid than that by virulent pathogens, as
observed with both CPN1 and PR1
(Fig. 4). Additional evidence
for the induction of CPN1 transcript accumulation via
gene-for-gene-mediated pathogen recognition came from the induction of
CPN1 transcript accumulation by glucocorticoid-inducible expression
of avrRpt2 in transgenic plants having a functional RPS2
gene (Fig. 6). The fact that
avrRpt2 expression in planta could specifically trigger CPN1
transcript accumulation, in the absence of any pathogen inoculation, and that
this induction required the presence of a functional RPS2 disease
resistance gene, suggests that CPN1 transcript accumulation is
responsive to gene-for-gene-mediated signaling.
The dependence of bacterial induction of CPN1 transcript
accumulation on a functional type III protein secretion system also supports a
specific role for the CPN1 gene product in plant responses to
pathogens (Fig. 5). The lack of
CPN1 transcript accumulation after inoculation with P.
fluorescens, a nonpathogenic strain related to P. syringae,
implies that CPN1 transcript accumulation is specifically triggered
by pathogenic bacteria. The lack of CPN1 transcript accumulation
after inoculation with the P. s. t. DC3000
(hrcU) mutant, which is defective in type III
protein secretion, indicates that a functional type III protein secretion
system is specifically required for induction of CPN1 transcript
accumulation by P. s. t. DC3000 bacteria
(Mudgett and Staskawicz,
1999 ). This also supports the conclusion that pathogenic bacteria
specifically stimulate CPN1 transcript accumulation because the
P. s. t. DC3000 (hrcU) mutant is
nonpathogenic (Mudgett and Staskawicz,
1999 ).
Our results also suggest that CPN1 may be involved in early steps
of plant defense: Induction of CPN1 transcript accumulation was
observed within 4 h after inoculation, which was substantially faster than
PR1 gene transcript accumulation
(Fig. 4). The transient nature
of CPN1 transcript accumulation implies that the role of the
CPN1 gene product in defense may be restricted to early steps. The
local rather than systemic induction of CPN1 transcript accumulation
is also consistent with a role for CPN1 as a suppressor of hypersensitive cell
death because in that case, CPN1 activity might be needed primarily near the
site of infection rather than systemically.
It is interesting to note that although SA treatment could induce
CPN1 transcript accumulation in WT plants, the induction of cell
death in the lesion mimic mutants lsd1 and lsd5 did not
stimulate CPN1 expression, even though, in lsd1 at least,
runaway cell death requires SA accumulation
(Aviv et al., 2002 ). This could
indicate that CPN1 is not involved in the cell death signaling
pathways defined by lsd1 and lsd5, or, perhaps, induction of
CPN1 expression in the mutants occurred in a transient manner but was
overlooked due to the time intervals used. Alternatively, if CPN1 is a
necessary repressor of the HR, then the lack of expression of CPN1 in
the lsd1 and lsd5 mutants may represent part of the defect
of these mutants, and the lack of CPN1 transcript accumulation might
actually contribute to the lesion mimic phenotype of these mutants.
Taken together, the increased disease resistance, lesion mimic, and
accelerated HR phenotypes of the cpn1-1 mutant and the gene
expression patterns of the CPN1 gene suggest that the CPN1
gene product may function as a negative regulator of plant defense responses,
including the HR. The strong, rapid, and specific activation of CPN1
gene transcript accumulation in response to pathogen inoculation implies that
plant defense functions could represent a primary role of CPN1. However, the
temperature- and humidity-related aspects of the cpn1-1 mutant
phenotype and the activation of CPN1 transcript accumulation by these
same environmental parameters adds another level of complexity to the
biological role of CPN1. Apparently, CPN1 plays a nonredundant role as a
suppressor of potentially cell death-inducing effects of LT and LH
environmental conditions.
Humidity and temperature play important roles in plant disease development
(Agrios, 1997 ), and overlaps
between environmental and pathogen signaling are not unusual in plants. In the
Arabidopsis lesion mimic mutants lsd6 and cpr22, HH has been
found to suppress the spontaneous lesion phenotype
(Weymann et al., 1995 ;
Yoshioka et al., 2001 ). Plants
treated with avirulent pathogen and grown under HH conditions have been found
to have a delayed HR with reduced SA levels
(Hammond-Kosack et al., 1996 ).
Although the mode of action of HH in modifying plant defense responses is not
clear, these observations suggest that HH has the potential to suppress the
HR- and SA-dependent defenses in plants. Similarly, a range of factors
including LT, LH, hyperosmolarity, wounding, and harpin elicitors have been
found to activate ATMPK4 and ATMPK6 rapidly in Arabidopsis
(Ichimura et al., 2000 ;
Desikan et al., 2001 ). In
addition, phenotypic analysis of the mpk4 mutant has revealed that
ATMPK4 may serve as a negative regulator of SAR
(Petersen et al., 2000 ). Also,
the EDS5 gene is activated by UV light and pathogens
(Nawrath et al., 2002 ). These
findings implicate a connection between abiotic and biotic stress signaling.
This connection could provide a molecular basis for the phenomenon of cross
tolerance in plants, in which a plant subjected to one stress, such as UV
light or ozone, for example, can become more resistant to pathogens
(Yalpani et al., 1994 ;
Sharma et al., 1996 ;
Bowler and Fluhr, 2000 ).
But what could account for the apparent involvement of CPN1 in plant
responses to both biotic and abiotic stimuli? It is possible that the answer
could be related to Ca2+. Ca2+ is
a ubiquitous second messenger that is involved in plant responses to diverse
stimuli, such as drought, touch, cold, heat, and oxidative stress (for review,
see Knight, 2000 ;
Reddy, 2001 ).
Ca2+ fluxes are involved in defense signaling in plants
(Zimmermann et al., 1997 ;
Grant et al., 2000 ). Because
Ca2+ is such a nonspecific signaling molecule that is
involved in many different types of signaling pathways, the specificity of
Ca2+ signaling must be accomplished by the timing,
duration, and location of Ca2+ fluxes
(McAinsh and Hetherington,
1998 ; Bowler and Fluhr,
2000 ). It is possible that CPN1, as a
Ca2+-dependent membrane-associated protein, is involved
in determining the specificity of Ca2+ signaling and
preventing inappropriate defense responses to LT and LH conditions. The
mechanism of action of the CPN1 protein is unknown, but it has been
hypothesized that copines may function by recruiting proteins with which they
interact via their VWA domain to a membrane location
(Tomsig et al., 2003 ).
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS
|
|---|
All experiments described were replicated independently at least two to
four times with similar results.
Plant Growth Conditions
All plants were grown in a soil-less potting mix (Scotts Redi-earth Plug
and Seedling Mix, E.C. Geiger, Inc., Harleysville, PA) and irrigated with
distilled water. Plants grown for cpn1-1 mutant phenotypic analysis
and for analysis of humidity and temperature dependence of CPN1
transcript accumulation were grown under SD conditions with a light
intensity of 75 to 100 µmol m2
s1, whereas temperature and humidity parameters
were varied as described in "Results." Plants used for analysis of
bacterial induction of CPN1 gene expression, including WT,
cpn1-1, and DEX:: avrRpt2 plants, were grown under LT, LH,
SD conditions and 60 to 70 µmol m2
s1 light intensity. lsd1 plants were
grown under LT, LH, SD conditions and 60 to 70 µmol
m2 s1 light
intensity for 4 weeks and then moved to LT, LH, LD conditions and 75 to 100
µmol m2 s1 light
intensity. lsd5 mutant plants were grown under LT, LH, LD and 75 to
100 µmol m2 s1
light intensity conditions for 3 weeks and then moved to LT, LH, SD
conditions and 60 to 70 µmol m2
s1 light intensity.
In Planta Bacterial Growth Analyses
These assays were performed by infiltration inoculation as described
previously, except that bacterial populations were assayed at 0 and 3 d after
inoculation. The bacterial strains used were the same as described previously
(Jambunathan et al.,
2001 ).
Bacterial Induction of CPN1 Expression
The Pseudomonas syringae pv tomato (P. s. t.)
DC3000 and P. s. t. DC3000 (avrRpt2) bacterial strains were
the same as used previously. P. s. t. DC3000 (avrRpm1)
bacteria carried the plasmid pVARM (Kunkel
et al., 1993 ). The hrcU mutant carries
a Tn3gus transposon insertion into the hrcU gene
(Mudgett and Staskawicz,
1999 ). All the strains were grown at 28°C on Pseudomonas agar
F (Sigma, St. Louis) media supplemented with 100 µg
mL1 rifampicin and 25 µg
mL1 kanamycin (Sigma). The Pseudomonas
fluorescens strain was grown at 28°C on Pseudomonas agar F
supplemented with 20 µg mL1 nalidixic acid
(Sigma). Leaves of 5-week-old plants were syringe inoculated with bacteria
suspended in 10 mM MgCl2 at a concentration of 1 x
106 cfu mL1. After inoculation, the
plants were maintained under SD, LH, LT conditions and 60 to 70
µmol m2 s1 light
intensity. DEX treatments were performed by syringe infiltration of DEX
(Sigma) as described previously (McNellis
et al., 1998 ).
SA Treatments
Five-week-old plants were sprayed to the point of runoff with 1
mM SA (Sigma) in water with 0.025% (v/v) Silwet L-77
surfactant (Lehle Seeds, Round Rock, TX). Control plants were sprayed with
water containing 0.025% (v/v) Silwet L-77. The plants were left
covered with a dome for 4 h to maintain HH, after which the dome was removed.
Tissues were harvested 24 h after treatment.
RNA Isolation and RNA Gel-Blot Analyses
Leaf tissue was collected from treated plants and flash frozen in liquid
nitrogen. The permissive condition RNA sample for the lsd1 mutant was
obtained from leaf tissue collected from 4-week-old lsd1 mutant
plants grown under continuous SD conditions. The nonpermissive
condition RNA sample for the lsd1 mutant was obtained from
lsd1 mutant plants grown under SD conditions for 4 weeks
and then moved to LD conditions for 48 h, at which time spreading lesions were
observed. The permissive condition RNA samples for the lsd5 mutant
were obtained from leaf tissues collected from 4-week-old lsd5 mutant
plants grown under LD conditions. The nonpermissive condition RNA samples for
the lsd5 mutant were obtained from lsd5 mutant plants grown
under LD conditions for 3 weeks and then moved to SD conditions for
48 h, at which time lesion formation was evident. RNA extractions and RNA gel
blotting were performed as described previously, except that 15 µg of total
RNA was loaded in each gel lane in all gel-blot experiments
(Jambunathan et al., 2001 ).
The PR1, PR2, and PR5 gene probes were the same as
described previously (Jambunathan et al.,
2001 ). The CPN1 gene-specific probe consisted of a 738-bp
fragment corresponding to amino acids 332 to 578 of the predicted CPN1
protein. This probe allowed the specific detection of CPN1 transcript
without hybridization to transcripts from other, highly homologous copine
genes. The probe was generated by PCR amplification using a CPN1 cDNA
clone plasmid as the template and the following primers: forward primer,
5'-TCTAGAGTACTTGGCATCTGGA-3'; and reverse primer,
5'-GAATTCTCATGGAGGAATCGGTTTCAT-3'; with annealing at
55°C. The primers contain engineered XbaI and EcoRI
restriction sites, respectively (in italics); CPN1-homologous
sequences are in roman. The PCR-amplified product was cloned into the
pCR-Blunt vector using the Zero Blunt PCR cloning kit according to the
manufacturer's instructions (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA). The cloned product was
released using XbaI and EcoRI restriction enzymes (New
England Biolabs, Beverly, MA). The released product was resolved on an agarose
gel, extracted, and purified using the Qiaex II Gel Extraction Kit (Qiagen,
Valencia, CA). About 25 to 50 ng of the cleaned product was used for probe
labeling with dCTP 32P using the Redi-prime labeling kit
(Amersham-Biotech, Piscataway, NJ) according to the manufacturer's
instructions. The labeled probe was cleaned using Performa spin columns (Edge
Biosystems, Gaithersburg, MD) according to the manufacturer's instructions.
Northern hybridization was performed at 42°C using Ultrahyb hybridization
buffer as recommended by the manufacturers (Ambion, Austin, TX). Blot washing
and exposure were performed as described previously
(McNellis et al., 1998 ).
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
|
|---|
We thank Jeffery Dangl for the lsd1 and lsd5 seeds; Brian
Staskawicz for the ndr1-1, eds5-1, and npr1-2
seeds; Ramesh Raina for the PR1, PR2, and PR5 gene
probes; and Brian Staskawicz for all of the P. s. t. strains and the
P. fluorescens strain. We thank Seogchan Kang and Ramamurthy
Mahalingam for technical assistance. We thank Seogchan Kang, C. Peter Romaine,
and four anonymous reviewers for their critical comments on the manuscript. We
thank Philip Jensen, Judith Sinn, S. Kang, Tzuu-fen Lee, Jianxin Liu, Justin
Dillon, and Andrew Stephenson for many helpful discussions.
Received March 4, 2003;
returned for revision March 19, 2003;
accepted April 3, 2003.
 |
FOOTNOTES
|
|---|
Article, publication date, and citation information can be found at
www.plantphysiol.org/cgi/doi/10.1104/pp.103.022970.
1 This work was supported by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Cooperative
State Research, Education, and Extension Service grant program (grant no.
20023531911561 to T.W.M.). 
*
Corresponding author; e-mail
mcnellis{at}psu.edu;
fax 8148637217.
 |
LITERATURE CITED
|
|---|
Aarts N, Metz M, Holub E, Staskawicz BJ, Daniels MJ, Parker
JE (1998) Different requirements for EDS1 and
NDR1 by disease resistance genes define at least two R
gene-mediated signaling pathways in Arabidopsis. Proc Natl
Acad Sci USA 95:
1030610311[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Agrios GN (1997) Plant
Pathology, Ed 4. Academic Press, London
Akamatsu T, Hanzawa Y, Ohtake Y, Takahashi T, Nishitani K,
Komeda Y (1999) Expression of endoxyloglucan transferase
genes in acaulis mutants of Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol
121:
715721[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Alfano JR, Collmer A (1997) The type III (hrp)
secretion pathway of plant pathogenic bacteria: trafficking harpins, avr
proteins, and death. J Bacteriol
179:
56555662[Free Full Text]
Aviv DH, Rustérucci C, Holt IIIBF, Dietrich RA, Parker
JE, Dangl JL (2002) Runaway cell death, but not basal disease
resistance, in lsd1 is SA- and NIM1/NPR1-dependent.
Plant J 29:
381391[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Azzi A, Boscoboinik D, Hensey C (1992) The
protein kinase C family. Eur J Biochem
208:
547557[ISI][Medline]
Bent AF, Kunkel BN, Dahlbeck D, Brown KL, Schmidt R, Giraudat J,
Leung J, Staskawicz BJ (1994) RPS2 of
Arabidopsis thaliana: a leucine-rich repeat class of plant disease
resistance genes. Science 265:
18561860[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Bogdanove AJ, Beer SV, Bonas U, Boucher CA, Collmer A, Coplin
DL, Cornelis GR, Huang HC, Hutcheson SW, Panopoulos NJ et al.
(1996) Unified nomenclature for broadly conserved hrp
genes of pathogenic bacteria. Mol Microbiol
20:
681683[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Bolwell GP (1999) Role of active oxygen species
and NO in plant defense responses. Curr Opin Plant Biol
2:
287294[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Bowler C, Fluhr R (2000) The role of calcium
and activated oxygens as signals for controlling cross-tolerance.
Trends Plant Sci 5:
241246[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Bowling SA, Clarke JD, Liu Y, Klessig DF, Dong X
(1997) The cpr5 mutant of Arabidopsis expresses both
NPR1-dependent and NPR1-independent resistance. Plant Cell
9:
15731584[Abstract]
Bowling SA, Guo A, Cao H, Gordon AS, Klessig DF, Dong X
(1994) A mutation in Arabidopsis that leads to constitutive
expression of systemic acquired resistance. Plant Cell
6:
18451857[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Brose N, Hofmann K, Hata Y, Südhof TC
(1995) Mammalian homologues of Caenorhabditis elegans
unc-13 gene define novel family of C2-domain proteins. J Biol
Chem 270:
2527325280[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Cao H, Bowling SA, Gordon AS, Dong X (1994)
Characterization of an Arabidopsis mutant that is nonresponsive to inducers of
systemic acquired resistance. Plant Cell
6:
15831592[Abstract]
Cao H, Glazebrook J, Clarke JD, Volko S, Dong X
(1997) The Arabidopsis NPR1 gene that controls systemic
acquired resistance encodes a novel protein containing ankyrin repeats.
Cell 88:
5763[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Century KS, Holub EB, Staskawicz BJ (1995)
NDR1, a locus of Arabidopsis thaliana that is required for
disease resistance both to a bacterial and a fungal pathogen. Proc Natl
Acad Sci USA 92:
65976601[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Century KS, Shapiro AD, Repetti PP, Dahlbeck D, Holub E,
Staskawicz BJ (1997) NDR1, a pathogen-induced
component required for Arabidopsis disease resistance.
Science 278:
19631965[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Chamnongpol S, Willekens H, Langebartels C, Van Montagu M,
Inzé D, Van Camp W (1996) Transgenic tobacco with a
reduced catalase activity develops necrotic lesions and induces
pathogenesis-related expression under high light. Plant J
10:
491503[CrossRef]
Clarke JD, Liu Y, Klessig DF, Dong X (1998)
Uncoupling PR gene expression from NPR1 and bacterial resistance:
characterization of the dominant Arabidopsis cpr61 mutant.
Plant Cell 10:
557569[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Creutz CE, Tomsig JL, Snyder SL, Gautier MC, Skouri F, Beisson
J, Cohen J (1998) The copines, a novel class of C2
domain-containing, calcium-dependent, phospholipid-binding proteins conserved
from Paramecium to humans. J Biol Chem
273:
13931402[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Desikan R, Hancock JT, Ichimura K, Shinozaki K, Neill SJ
(2001) Harpin induces activation of the Arabidopsis
mitogen-activated protein kinases AtMPK4 and AtMPK6. Plant
Physiol 126:
15791587[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Dietrich RA, Delaney TP, Uknes SJ, Ward ER, Ryals JA, Dangl
JL (1994) Arabidopsis mutants simulating disease resistance
responses. Cell 77:
565577[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Dietrich RA, Richberg MH, Schmidt R, Dean C, Dangl JL
(1997) A novel zinc finger protein is encoded by the Arabidopsis
LSD1 gene and functions as a negative regulator of cell death.
Cell 88:
685694[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Essen LO, Perisic O, Cheung R, Katan M, Williams RL
(1996) Crystal structure of a mammalian phosphoinositide-specific
phospholipase C . Nature
380:
595602[CrossRef][Medline]
Falk A, Feys BJ, Frost LN, Jones JDG, Daniels MJ, Parker JE
(1999) EDS1, an essential component of R
gene-mediated disease resistance in Arabidopsis has homology to
eukaryotic lipases. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
96:
32923297[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Gaffney T, Friederich L, Vernooij B, Negrotto D, Nye G, Uknes S,
Ward E, Kessmann H, Ryals J (1993) Requirement of salicylic
acid for induction of systemic acquired resistance. Science
261:
754756
Gilmour SJ, Sebolt AM, Salazar MP, Everard JD, Thomashow MF
(2000) Overexpression of the Arabidopsis CBF3
transcriptional activator mimics multiple biochemical changes associated with
cold acclimation. Plant Physiol
124:
18541865[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Gilmour SJ, Zarka DG, Stockinger EJ, Salazar MP, Houghton JM,
Thomashow MF (1998) Low temperature regulation of the
Arabidopsis CBF family of AP2 transcriptional activators as an early
step in cold-induced COR gene expression. Plant J
16:
433442[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Grant M, Brown I, Adams S, Knight M, Ainslie A, Mansfield J
(2000) The RPM1 plant disease resistance gene
facilitates a rapid and sustained increase in cytosolic calcium that is
necessary for the oxidative burst and hypersensitive cell death. Plant
J 23:
441450[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Greenberg JT, Ausubel FM (1993)
Arabidopsis mutants compromised for the control of cellular damage
during pathogenesis and aging. Plant J
4:
327341[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Greenberg JT, Guo A, Klessig DF, Ausubel FM
(1994) Programmed cell death in plants: a pathogen-triggered
response activated coordinately with multiple defense functions.
Cell 77:
551563[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Hahlbrock K, Scheel D, Logemann E, Numberger T, Parniske M,
Reinold S, Sacks WR, Schmelzer E (1995) Oligopeptide
elicitor-mediated defense gene activation in cultured parsley cells.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 92:
41504157[Abstract/Free Full Text]
Hammond-Kosack KE, Silverman P, Raskin I, Jones JDG
(1996) Race-specific elicitors of Cladosporium fulvum
induce changes in cell morphology and the synthesis of ethylene and salicylic
acid in tomato plants carrying the corresponding Cf disease
resistance gene. Plant Physiol
110:
13811394[Abstract]
He SY, Huang HC, Collmer A (1993)
Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae harpinPss: a
protein that is secreted via the hrp pathway and elicits the hypersensitive
response in plants. Cell 73:
12551266[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
Hua J, Grisafi P, Cheng SH, Fink GR (2001)
Plant growth homeostasis is controlled by the Arabidopsi |