|
|
||||||||
|
First published online June 4, 2004; 10.1104/pp.103.036749 Plant Physiology 135:1113-1128 (2004) © 2004 American Society of Plant Biologists The Transcriptional Innate Immune Response to flg22. Interplay and Overlap with Avr Gene-Dependent Defense Responses and Bacterial Pathogenesis1,[w]The Sainsbury Laboratory, John Innes Centre, Norwich Research Park, United Kingdom (L.N., O.R., I.K., J.D.G.J.); and Friedrich Miescher-Institut for Biomedical Research, CH4058 Basel, Switzerland (C.Z., S.R., T.B.)
Animals and plants carry recognition systems to sense bacterial flagellin. Flagellin perception in Arabidopsis involves FLS2, a Leu-rich-repeat receptor kinase. We surveyed the early transcriptional response of Arabidopsis cell cultures and seedlings within 60 min of treatment with flg22, a peptide corresponding to the most conserved domain of flagellin. Using Affymetrix microarrays, approximately 3.0% of 8,200 genes displayed transcript level changes in flg22 elicited suspension cultures and seedlings. FLARE (Flagellin Rapidly Elicited) genes mostly encode signaling components, such as transcription factors, protein kinases/phosphatases, and proteins that regulate protein turnover. Approximately 80% of flg22-induced genes were also up-regulated in Arabidopsis seedlings treated with cycloheximide. This suggests that many FLARE genes are negatively regulated by rapidly turned-over repressor proteins. Twenty-one tobacco Avr9/Cf-9 rapidly elicited (ACRE) cDNA full-length sequences were used to search for their Arabidopsis orthologs (AtACRE). We identified either single or multiple putative orthologs for 17 ACRE genes. For 13 of these ACRE genes, at least one Arabidopsis ortholog was induced in flg22-elicited Arabidopsis suspension cells and seedlings. This result revealed a substantial overlap between the Arabidopsis flg22 response and the tobacco Avr9 race-specific defense response. We also compared FLARE gene sets and genes induced in basal or gene-for-gene interactions upon different Pseudomonas syringae treatments, and infer that Pseudomonas syringae pv tomato represses the flagellin-initiated defense response.
Plants and animals mount defense responses upon recognition of numerous pathogen-derived molecules. These pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) include bacterial cell wall components such as lipopolysaccharide (Ulevitch and Tobias, 1999
In gene-for-gene relationships, plants carrying a resistance (R) gene resist pathogen races with the corresponding avirulence (Avr) gene (Flor, 1971
Bacterial plant pathogens can also be recognized in a gene-for-gene manner. Bacterial Avr proteins are translocated into the host cells through a type III protein secretion system (Galan and Collmer, 1999
Most plants are resistant to most pathogens through a basal defense mechanism referred to as nonhost resistance, which is based on both constitutive and inducible defense responses. For instance, the nonhost bacterium P. syringae pv tabaci induces accumulation of defense transcripts in Phaseolus vulgaris, leading to antimicrobial phytoalexin production (Jakobek et al., 1993 The goal of this study was to investigate the possible connections between innate immunity, race-specific, and nonhost types of resistance responses. Using a high-density oligonucleotide microarray (Affymetrix, La Jolla, CA), we studied the rapid changes in gene expression that occur in Arabidopsis cell cultures and seedlings treated with the flg22 peptide. We found that these flagellin rapidly elicited (FLARE) genes mostly encode signaling components. The flg22-rapidly elicited genes in cell cultures were called cFLARE genes and in seedlings sFLARE genes. The majority of these genes were also up-regulated upon treatments with the protein synthesis inhibitor cycloheximide (CHX), suggesting that FLARE genes are negatively regulated by rapidly turned-over repressor proteins. Analysis of a set of Arabidopsis ACRE orthologs revealed a substantial overlap between the Avr9 race-specific response in tobacco and the flg22-elicited innate immune response in Arabidopsis, suggesting that at least some polymorphic race-specific resistance mechanisms have evolved from mechanisms that recognize PAMPs. Finally, a comparison of genes that were up-regulated upon treatments with either virulent, avirulent, or nonhost P. syringae strains revealed that (1) genes induced in nonhost interactions might be regulated through PAMP perception, (2) some type III effector proteins could suppress PAMP-induced genes, and (3) Avr proteins, if recognized through an R gene, might positively regulate the PAMP-mediated innate immune response.
Validation of Cell Culture and Seedling Systems for flg22 Inducibility
To monitor gene expression changes in response to flg22, cell suspension cultures of Arabidopsis ecotype Landsberg erecta (Ler) were exposed in two independent experiments to 100 nM flg22. RNA was prepared from cells 30 and 60 min after elicitation. Control samples were taken from cultures treated with dimethyl sulfoxide, and from untreated cell cultures. Elicitors, such as flg22, induce medium alkalinization and ethylene production (Felix et al., 1999
Identification and Classification of Early flg22-Regulated Genes
We used high-density oligonucleotide arrays (Affymetrix) to study early flg22-induced changes in gene expression and to identify flg22-rapidly elicited (FLARE) genes. The arrays contain probe sets for about 8,200 different Arabidopsis genes (Zhu and Wang, 2000 In our Ler cell culture assay, 225 cFLARE distinct genes (approximately 2.8%) showed significant changes in mRNA level over 60 min (see Supplemental Table I, which can be viewed at www.plantphysiol.org). Ninety-three genes were significantly induced, whereas only six genes were repressed at both timepoints (see Supplemental Tables II and III). Analysis of our seedling data revealed 252 sFLARE distinct genes that were significantly altered upon flg22 elicitation (see Supplemental Table IV).
Overall, 80% of the FLARE genes are currently annotated as encoding proteins of known or predicted function. We functionally classified these as signal transduction-related, signal-perception-related, effector proteins, and others (see Supplemental Tables VVIII and Fig. 2, A and B). Among the signal transduction-related genes, many are transcription factors, which represent 43% and 52% of the overall signaling class in suspension cells and seedlings, respectively, and include several WRKY transcription factors (Table I). Among those, we identified AtWRKY6 (At1g62300; Robatzek and Somssich, 2002
A number of FLARE genes encode proteins involved in regulating protein turnover such as U-box and RING zinc-finger proteins (Table I). This is consistent with other results indicating an important role for protein turnover in derepressing plant defenses (Peart et al., 2002
The group of signal-perception-related genes includes resistance-like genes and genes required for resistance (Table II). Among those, we identified RPS2 that confers resistance to P. syringae carrying AvrRpt2 (Kunkel et al., 1993
The full complement of FLARE genes also comprises some which might be directly involved in halting the growth of pathogens (effector class), e.g. enzymes involved in phenylpropanoid metabolism (see Supplemental Table VII).
We found approximately 70% of the cFLARE genes in 30-min treated cell cultures were also significantly induced in flg22 treated seedlings (see Supplemental Tables I and IV). In contrast, we observed that approximately 40% of the sFLARE genes identified in elicited seedlings were also up-regulated in the 30-min treated cell cultures highlighting a larger set of flg22 regulated genes in the seedling system (see Supplemental Table IX). Only one gene, encoding a putative calcium-dependent protein kinase (At1g08650), was down-regulated upon flg22 treatment in both Arabidopsis suspension cells and seedlings (see Supplemental Table X). Most auxin signaling-related genes revealed a similar repression profile in both systems, but none of these repressed genes were identical (Table I). These observations might not only be due to different flg22 concentrations used, but may also result from either the use of different ecotypes or different experimental systems. To address this, we performed RT-PCR on PAL2 (At3g53260), AtMYB2 (At2g47190), and 4CL (At1g51680) on Col-0 cell cultures and Ler cell cultures elicited with 100 nM of flg22 peptide over a 1-h time course. These genes were chosen based on their high inducibility in treated Ler suspension cells and no transcript change in treated Col-0 seedlings. Our results showed a similar pattern of induction in both Col-0 and Ler cell cultures (Fig. 3). In addition, no transcript alteration of these genes was detected in Ler seedlings treated with 10 µM flg22 peptide (data not shown). These data suggest that the differences in gene expression between Ler suspension cells versus Col-0 seedlings are mostly due to differences between cell cultures and seedlings rather than to differences between ecotypes.
Comparison of ACRE and FLARE Gene Complements
Both FLARE genes and ACRE (Durrant et al., 2000
With the exceptions of tobacco ACRE137, ACRE141, ACRE216, and ACRE275, at least one of the Arabidopsis ACRE orthologs was induced in flg22-elicited Arabidopsis suspension cells (Fig. 4A). The overall expression analysis revealed 13 rapidly and transiently flg22-induced genes and 5 progressively induced genes (Table III; Fig. 4A). Whereas CPK1 (At5g04870) was not induced based on our microarray analysis filters, we observed a slight induction of this gene in elicited cell cultures (Fig. 4A). In elicited seedlings, most of the AtACRE genes displayed a very similar expression pattern to that in suspension cells (Table III; Fig. 4B). Besides the confirmation of our microarray data, these results revealed a substantial overlap between the Avr9 race-specific defense response in tobacco and the flg22-elicited innate immune response in Arabidopsis.
Clustering Analysis of FLARE Genes in Arabidopsis Suspension Cells
We identified 3 significant clusters of (1) progressively induced genes (110 genes), (2) transiently induced genes (44 genes), and (3) progressively repressed genes (31 genes; see Supplemental Tables XIXIII). These clusters were identified by subjecting the absolute expression values of the overall FLARE genes over the time course to a self-organizing map (SOM) algorithm using 3 x 1 two-dimensional matrix (see "Materials and Methods" for details). Within the cluster of transiently induced genes, we found the Arabidopsis ACRE orthologs AtACRE1a/b (At5g47230, At4g17490), AtACRE111 (At4g25470), AtACRE132 (At3g16720), AtACRE231b/c (At1g70090, At1g24170), AtACRE264a (At2g05940), and AtACRE284a/c (At2g30020, At2g40180; see Supplemental Table XII). To gain more insight into the FLARE gene regulation, we inspected promoter sequences of genes that clustered together with the progressively induced AtACRE31 ortholog (At4g20780). This task was performed using GENESPRING software and resulted in the identification of 48 candidates within the AtACRE31 regulon (see Supplemental Table XIV). We scanned 1.1-kb ATG-upstream sequences for 5 to 8 bp motifs that are over-represented within the AtACRE31 regulon using GENESPRING (see "Materials and Methods" for details). As a result, we found a significant increase in the frequency of one of these motifs, namely TTTGAC(T/A), in 28 of the 48 promoters tested (data not shown); the TTTGACT sequence representing the consensus binding site for WRKY transcription factors (Eulgem et al., 2000
To further confirm this statistical analysis we inspected the promoter sequences of the entire set of genes within the AtACRE31 regulon for over-representation of TTTGACT and TTTGACA sequences as well as other known regulatory elements as previously described (Maleck et al., 2000
Relationship between the FLARE Gene Set and Sets of Genes Regulated by P. syringae in Nonhost, Compatible, and Incompatible Interactions
To further analyze the relation between flg22-triggered early responses and basal or gene-for-gene resistance, we compared the FLARE genes to the set of genes regulated by different bacterial treatments in Arabidopsis (Tao et al., 2003 We decided to focus our comparative analysis on up-regulated genes and carried out a comparison with data sets derived from 3 hpi and 6 hpi of P. syringae pv tomato (Pst), P. syringae pv phaseolicola (Psp), and P. syringae pv tomato (Pst) carrying either AvrB or AvrRpt2 bacterial strains.
As in the Tao et al. (2003)
In the nonhost interaction, we found that 12% of the genes induced after 3 hpi with Psp overlap with flg22-induced genes from both Arabidopsis elicited seedlings and cell cultures (Table V). Similar analysis at the 6 hpi timepoint revealed a more substantial overlap of 34% commonly induced genes between FLARE genes and genes induced by Psp bacterial treatment (Table VI). Highlights of these genes include 5 members of WRKY transcription factors, 16 receptor-like kinases, and 9 genes involved in the production of ROS (see Supplemental Table XVI). Although we did not have any data with hrp mutants from Psp, the majority of these genes might be induced in a PAMP dependent manner (Jakobek and Lindgren, 1993
The analysis of genes induced in compatible interactions revealed a much smaller overlap with the FLARE gene set than did the nonhost interaction. Indeed, only 7% of genes were commonly induced upon flg22 treatment and in 6 hpi with compatible Pst (Tables V and VI). Because flg22 peptide derived from P. syringae pv tomato is a potent elicitor of defense responses in Arabidopsis (data not shown), this result suggests that some type III secretion proteins from Pst are potentially involved in repressing the flagellin-mediated response. To identify potential targets of these type III suppressor proteins, we selected genes that were both flg22- and Psp-induced but not up-regulated in Pst compatible interactions at 6-hpi timepoint. From this gene list, we also subtracted genes that were still induced in P. syringae pv maculicola at the same timepoint (data not shown). This allows the identification of candidates targeted by two different P. syringae pathovars. These genes are potentially involved in the nonhost resistance phenomenon observed in the Arabidopsis-Psp interaction. As a result of this analysis, we discovered 77 candidate genes including 11 transcription factors and 8 receptor-like kinases as examples (Table VII; see Supplemental Table XVII). Of these, 2 glycosyl-hydrolases (At3g13790, At3g54420) might be involved in cell wall synthesis, which is in agreement with recent report suggesting that P. syringae type III effectors might suppress cell wall based plant defense 12 hpi with virulent Pst DC3000 (Hauck et al., 2003
We also identified a 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate synthase, termed AtACS6 gene (At4g11280), which represents a key component of ethylene biosynthesis together with the ethylene responsive transcription factor AtERF5 (At5g47230), suggesting that Pst might suppress some ethylene-related genes (see Supplemental Table XVII in information).
Moreover, of the three RING zinc finger genes that were induced upon both Psp and flg22 treatments, none was induced 6 hpi with either Pst or Psm treatments (Table VII; Supplemental Table XVII). This result is consistent with the involvement of protein turnover components in nonhost resistance (Peart et al., 2002
Interestingly, although not present on this array, the nonhost resistance gene NHO1 (At1g80460) is induced in Arabidopsis elicited cell cultures (data not shown) and the expression of this gene is also suppressed 6 hpi with Pst strain (Kang et al., 2003
Among the 77 candidate genes mentioned, 35 were induced specifically in interactions involving AvrB or AvrRpt2 with the cognate R gene, suggesting that the R-gene/Avr-gene interaction negates the suppression effect mediated by virulent bacteria as suggested for NHO1 gene (Kang et al., 2003 In more general terms, we found that approximately 45% of the FLARE genes were also induced 3 hpi with Pst carrying either AvrB or AvrRpt2 (Table V; Supplemental Table XV). Of these, approximately 30% are induced in an AvrB- or AvrRpt2-specific manner, based on Pst (AvrB) versus Pst and Pst (AvrRpt2) versus Pst comparisons (Table V; Supplemental Table XVI). This result suggests that Avr effector proteins might trigger a common gene subset very early after race-specific elicitor recognition and therefore enhance the PAMP-mediated innate immune response. At 6-hpi timepoint, we observed a decrease in the overlap between FLARE genes and genes up-regulated by AvrB and AvrRpt2 race-specific elicitors; only approximately 25% of overlap was found between the flg22-induced genes and genes induced by either AvrB or AvrRpt2 (Table VI). In addition, only approximately 20% of the FLARE genes were induced at 9 hpi of either Pst (AvrB) or Pst (AvrRpt2; data not shown). This last result suggests that the flg22 response and the AvrB/AvrRpt2-mediated defense responses might diverge at later timepoints explaining the different outcomes between these responses such as cell death in AvrB/AvrRpt2- but not in flg22-induced defense.
The protein synthesis inhibitor CHX was used to assess whether the FLARE genes require de novo protein synthesis for their transcriptional activation. Arabidopsis seedlings were treated for 30 min with CHX prior to a 30-min treatment with flg22 peptide (see "Materials and Methods" for details). Transcriptional changes were then monitored by microarray and similar criteria were used to select differentially expressed genes as described before (see "Materials and Methods" for details). We found that approximately 70% of the overall FLARE genes displayed similar transcriptional changes in CHX/flg22 treated seedlings (see Supplemental Table XVIII). Moreover, by taking the FLARE induced genes as a baseline, we found that approximately 92% of the flg22-induced genes are up-regulated upon both CHX and flg22 (see Supplemental Table XIX). This result suggests that new protein synthesis is not required to induce the vast majority of the FLARE genes. On the contrary, the analysis of nonoverlapping genes revealed approximately 70% of genes predicted to be repressed by flg22 (see Supplemental Table XX). This observation suggests that the majority of flg22-repressed genes require de novo protein for their transcriptional inactivation.
Interestingly, when Arabidopsis seedlings were treated with CHX alone, 82% of the FLARE genes were induced (see Supplemental Table XIX). This result is consistent with the transcriptional activation of a large set of ACRE genes in Cf-9-tobacco cell culture challenged with CHX for 30 min (Durrant et al., 2000
The innate immune response mediated by pathogen molecules, also referred to as PAMPs is shared between plants and mammals (Gómez-Gómez and Boller, 2002 To further analyze the cross-talk between flg22-innate immune response, nonhost interaction, gene-for-gene, and compatible interactions, we compared our set of FLARE genes with genes up-regulated in Pst, Pst carrying either AvrB or AvrRpt2, and Psp inoculations. This comparative analysis suggests that (1) the flagellin response is likely to mimic nonhost defense responses, (2) Pst might suppress the expression of genes potentially involved in nonhost resistance as well as gene-for-gene resistance, and (3) incompatible interactions mediated by either AvrB or AvrRpt2 might negate this suppression effect and thus promote resistance. We also identified potential targets for P. syringae pv tomato and maculicola suppressor type III proteins.
Treatment of Arabidopsis cell cultures and seedlings with flg22 elicitor results in the differential regulation of 3% of 8,200 genes within 60 min. None of these genes was induced or repressed in an fls2-17 seedling mutant after flg22 treatment (Zipfel et al., 2004
An interesting feature of the flg22/FLS2 response is the repression of auxin signaling-related genes in Arabidopsis treated cell cultures and seedlings, including genes encoding Aux/IAA proteins. Aux/IAA proteins were first isolated as members of a gene family that is rapidly induced in response to auxin (Abel et al., 1994
Among the FLARE genes, several genes potentially involved in protein degradation were identified. In the early innate immune response in mammals, the proteolytic degradation of I
Upon flg22 treatment, 10 genes encoding RING zinc-finger proteins were significantly induced (Table I). Such proteins are thought to have an E3-ligase activity and previous studies revealed their involvement in the elicitor response (Salinas-Mondragon et al., 1999
We identified several resistance genes, putative resistance genes and RLK genes that are induced upon flg22 treatment. These genes were classified as signal-perception-related genes (Table II). The RLKs belong to various subclasses according to their extracellular domains and are likely involved in recognition of extracellular signals. For example, we found an RLK with a lysin extracellular domain (At2g33580). This conserved motif was originally identified in bacteria and is thought to function in general peptidoglycan binding (Ponting et al., 1999
Nonspecific recognition of general elicitors produced by nonhost pathogens plays a major role in the nonhost inducible defense response (Jakobek and Lindgren, 1993
The early transcriptional changes that occur in the Arabidopsis flg22/FLS2 response and the tobacco Avr9/Cf-9 responses display a striking overlap. For 13 out of 17 tobacco ACRE full-length cDNAs, we found that at least one representative of their orthologs was also induced in flg22-elicited suspension cells and seedlings (Table III; Fig. 4). We also identified AtMPK3 (At3g45640) as flg22-induced (Fig. 1, B and D). This gene was reported to be involved in flg22 signaling (Nühse et al., 2000
We present here a model showing the interplay between flg22-triggered innate immune and early virulent and avirulent bacterial responses (Fig. 5). When potentially pathogenic P. syringae strains enter plant tissue, their PAMPs (such as flagellin) can elicit defenses through FLS2 and other receptors (arrow A). To suppress this elicitation, effector proteins are delivered into host cells through the type III secretion system (arrow B). In an incompatible interaction, some effector proteins (that can be recognized genetically as Avr proteins) interact with complexes containing host R proteins and elicit the defense response through R gene-dependent recognition (arrow C). This elicitation could occur through mechanisms that involve the central positive regulators of defense such as MAPKs or CDPKs that were targeted by the bacterial effector proteins.
After recognition, both race-specific and PAMP elicitors trigger similar responses such as ion fluxes, production of ROS, and activation of MAPKs and CDPKs (Felix et al., 1999 Overall, then, these data suggest that PAMPs such as flagellin play an important role in plant/pathogen interactions. Their existence has led to selection for a large set of bacterial effector proteins that suppress PAMP-elicited pathways. PAMP elicitation leads to elevated levels of R proteins and of receptors for PAMPs. This complex evolutionary interplay still provides fertile ground for exciting new insights into the mechanisms that are involved.
Cell Culture Materials and Elicitor Treatment
Cell cultures of Arabidopsis Ler were maintained and used for analysis 7 d after subculturing as previously described (Felix et al., 1999
After a 48-h treatment at 4°C, Arabidopsis Col-0 seeds were grown for 12 d on plates containing 1x Murashige and Skoog medium (Duchefa), 1% Suc, and 1% agar under continuous light conditions of 60 µE m2 s1 at 22°C. Seedlings were then transferred to liquid Murashige and Skoog medium (2 seedlings/500 µL of medium in wells of 24-well-plates). Two days after transfer the medium was supplied with flg22 peptide to a final concentration of 10 µM. Plantlets were collected 30 min after treatment, frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored at 80°C. In the case of the CHX experiment, 50 µM CHX was added 30 min prior to flg22 or water treatment. For assaying ethylene production, 2-week-old seedlings, grown in liquid Murashige and Skoog medium, were transferred to 6-mL glass tubes (2 seedlings/tube) containing 1 mL of an aqueous solution of 10 µM flg22. Vials were closed with rubber septa and ethylene accumulating in the free air was measured by gas chromatography.
For cell cultures, total RNA was extracted using Trizol-Reagent (Sigma). RNA samples were cleaned over Qiagen RNeasy mini-columns (Valencia, CA). For seedlings, total RNA was extracted using RNeasy Plant Mini kit (Qiagen). Genome arrays, washing, staining, and scanning were carried out according to the manufacturer's suggestions (Affymetrix).
Total RNA from two independent cell culture experiments were extracted as described previously and pooled. Two micrograms of DNase-treated RNA were reverse transcribed for 90 min at 42°C in a 20-µL reaction volume containing 1 unit of SuperScript II reverse transcriptase (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA), 250 µM each dNTP, 30 µM oligo(dT) 30 M primer, 20 units of RNase inhibitor, and 10 mM dithiothreitol. One microliter of the RT reaction was used for PCR in a 20-µL volume with 1 unit of Taq DNA-polymerase (Qiagen), 100 µM each dNTP, and 100 ng of each forward and reverse primers from AtACRE genes. PCR conditions were the following: 3 min, 94°C (first cycle); 30 s, 94°C; 30 s, 50°C; 1.5 min, 72°C (2427 cycles); and 10 min, 72°C (last cycle). PCR products were separated on a 1% agarose gel and visualized after ethidium bromide staining. To control equal cDNA amount in each reaction, a PCR was performed with primers corresponding to the actin gene (At5g09810), which is constitutively expressed in vegetative structures AC1 (5'-ATGGCAGACGGTGAGGATATTCA-3') and AC2 (5'-GCCTTTGCAATCCACATCTGTTTG-3').
Genes were considered as up- or down-regulated if their expression level in elicited Ler cell culture deviated (positively or negatively) more than 2.5-fold from that of the unelicited Ler cell cultures in both independent experiments and if the genes were called I for increase and D for decrease as a result of the statistical comparative analysis performed using Microarray Suite Software MAS4 (Affymetrix). Before applying this filter, genes with an expression level above 10 (noise level of expression) were previously selected. For the Col-0 seedling assay, similar criteria were used to select flg22-regulated genes and the statistical analysis were performed using MAS5 (Affymetrix). To generate the list of FLARE genes with their appropriate annotation, the Affymetrix probe set-IDs for the flg22-regulated genes were collected and used to retrieve annotation and AGI numbers from the Salk Institute Genomic Analysis Laboratory database SIGnAL (http://signal.salk.edu/tabout.htm). Alternatively, when gene annotations were not found, their corresponding cDNA sequences were collected using the Julian Schroeder's database (http://www.biology.ucsd.edu/labs/schroeder/trendsreview.html) and searched against TIGR (http://tigrblast.tigr.org/er-blast/index.cgi?project=ath1) as well as the MIPS (http://mips.gsf.de/proj/thal/db/search/blast_arabi.html) Arabidopsis databases using a BLASTN program (Altschul et al., 1997
Raw data derived from samples treated for 3 hpi and 6 hpi of water, P. syringae pv tomato (Pst), P. syringae pv tomato carrying either AvrB or AvrRpt2, and P. syringae pv phaseolicola (Psp) were used for analysis (Tao et al., 2003
Global analysis of temporal gene expression pattern was performed by subjecting the absolute expression values of the overall FLARE genes over the time course to a SOM algorithm using 3 x 1 two-dimensional matrix with default SOM filters (DMT, Affymetrix). The sequences of the 5' regions (up to 1,100 bp) were used to search for sequences (58 bp) that are over-represented within the progressively induced cluster (AtACRE31 regulon) and the transiently induced cluster (AtACRE1 regulon containg AtACRE111/132/264) compared with all genes outside of these clusters. This motif search algorithm was performed using GENESPRING software and only oligomers with P values below 0.05 cutoff were considered as significantly over-represented. For further promoter analysis, we extracted 1-kb promoter sequences from TAIR database (http://www.arabidopsis.org/tools/bulk/sequences/index.html) and analyzed the over-representation of this regulatory elements according to Maleck et al., 2000 Sequence data from this article have been deposited with the EMBL/GenBank data libraries under accession numbers. AF211527, AF211528, AF211529, AY220484, AF211530, AY220477, AF211532, AF211537, AY220478, AY220479, AY220480, AF211536, AY220481, AY220482, AY220483, AY220484, and AJ344154.
We thank J. Hadfield (JIC) and E. Oakeley (FMI) for help in the array procedure and analysis. We thank S. Peck for help throughout this work. We also thank K. Bouarab and Corbier for comments on the manuscript. Received November 25, 2003; returned for revision February 9, 2004; accepted February 11, 2004.
1 This work was supported by the Gatsby Charitable Foundation (to L.N. and O.R.), by a fellowship from the Human Frontiers Science Program (to O.R.), by the Novartis Research Foundation (to C.Z. and S.R.), and by a grant of the Swiss National Foundation (to T.B.).
2 These authors contributed equally to the paper.
3 Present address: Department of Botany, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
[w] The online version of this article contains Web-only data. Article, publication date, and citation information can be found at www.plantphysiol.org/cgi/doi/10.1104/pp.103.036749. * Corresponding author; e-mail jonathan.jones{at}sainsbury-laboratory.ac.uk; fax 441603450011.
Abel S, Oeller PW, Theologis A (1994) Early auxin-induced genes encode short-lived nuclear proteins. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91: 326330 Abel S, Nguyen MD, Theologis A (1995) The PS-IAA4/5-like family of early auxin-inducible mRNAs in Arabidopsis thaliana. J Mol Biol 251: 533549[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Altschul SF, Madden TL, Schaffer AA, Zhang J, Zhang Z, Miller W, Lipman DJ (1997) Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res 25: 33893402 Aravind L, Koonin EV (2000) The U-box is modified RING finger: a common domain in ubiquitination. Curr Biol 10: R132R134[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Asai T, Tena G, Plotnikova J, Willmann MR, Chiu WL, Gómez-Gómez L, Boller T, Ausubel FM, Sheen J (2002) MAP kinase signalling cascade in Arabidopsis innate immunity. Nature 415: 977983[CrossRef][Medline]
Austin MJ, Muskett P, Kahn K, Feys BJ, Jones JDG, Parker JE (2002) Regulatory role of SGT1 in early R gene-mediated plant defenses. Science 295: 20772080 Axtell MJ, Staskawicz BJ (2003) Initiation of RPS2-specified disease resistance in Arabidopsis is coupled to the AvrRpt2-directed elimination of RIN4. Cell 112: 369377[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Azevedo C, Sadanandom A, Kitagawa K, Freialdenhoven A, Shirasu K, Schulze-Lefert P (2002) The RAR1 interactor SGT1, an essential component of R gene-triggered disease resistance. Science 295: 20732076 Bateman A, Bycroft M (2000) The structure of a LysM domain from E. coli membrane-bound lytic murein transglycosylase D (MltD). J Mol Biol 299: 11131119[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Boch J, Joardar V, Gao L, Robertson TL, Lim M, Kunkel BN (2002) Identification of Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato genes induced during infection of Arabidopsis thaliana. Mol Microbiol 44: 7388[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Clough S, Fengler K, Yu I-C, Lippok B, Smith R, Bent A (2000) The Arabidopsis dnd1 "defense, no death" gene encodes a mutated cyclic nucleotide-gated ion channel. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97: 93239328 Collmer A, Lindeberg M, Petnicki-Ocwieja T, Schneider DJ, Alfano JR (2002) Genomic mining type III secretion system effectors in Pseudomonas syringae yields new picks for all TTSS prospectors. Trends Microbiol 10: 462469[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Dangl JL, Jones JDG (2001) Plant pathogens and integrated defence responses to infection. Nature 411: 826833[CrossRef][Medline]
Dangl JL, Ritter C, Gibbon MJ, Mur LA, Wood JR, Goss S, Mansfield J, Taylor JD, Vivian A (1992) Functional homologs of the Arabidopsis RPM1 disease resistance gene in bean and pea. Plant Cell 4: 13591369 Deshaies RJ (1999) SCF and cullin/RING H2-based ubiquitin ligases. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 15: 435467[CrossRef][Web of Science][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 plant cell death. Cell 88: 685694[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Durrant WE, Rowland O, Piedras P, Hammond-Kosack KE, Jones JDG (2000) cDNA-AFLP reveals a striking overlap in race-specific resistance and wound response gene expression profiles. Plant Cell 12: 963977 Espinosa A, Guo M, Tam VC, Fu ZQ, Alfano JR (2003) The Pseudomonas syringae type III-secreted protein HopPtoD2 possesses protein tyrosine phosphatase activity and suppresses programmed cell death in plants. Mol Microbiol 49: 377387[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Eulgem T, Rushton PJ, Robatzek S, Somssich IE (2000) The WRKY superfamily of plant transcription factors. Trends Plant Sci 5: 199206[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Felix G, Duran JD, Volko S, Boller T (1999) Plants have a sensitive perception system for the most conserved domain of bacterial flagellin. Plant J 18: 265276[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Ferrando A, Farras R, Jasik J, Scheel J, Koncz C (2000) Intron-tagged epitope: a tool for facile detection and purification of proteins expressed in Agrobacterium-transformed plant cells. Plant J 22: 553560[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Flor HH (1971) Current status of the gene-for-gene concept. Annu Rev Phytopathol 9: 275298[CrossRef][Web of Science]
Fouts DE, Abramovitch RB, Alfano JR, Baldo AM, Buell CR, Cartinhour S, Chatterjee AK, D'Ascenzo M, Gwinn ML, Lazarowitz SG, et al. (2002) Genomewide identification of Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato DC3000 promoters controlled by the HrpL alternative sigma factor. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99: 22752280
Frye CA, Innes RW (1998) An Arabidopsis mutant with enhanced resistance to powdery mildew. Plant Cell 10: 947956
Galan JE, Collmer A (1999) Type III secretion machines: bacterial devices for protein delivery into host cells. Science 284: 13221328
Gómez-Gómez L, Bauer Z, Boller T (2001) Both the extracellular leucine-rich repeat domain and the kinase activity of FLS2 are required for flagellin binding and signaling in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 13: 11551163 Gómez-Gómez L, Boller T (2002) Flagellin perception: a paradigm for innate immunity. Trends Plant Sci 7: 251256[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Gómez-Gómez L, Felix G, Boller T (1999) A single locus determines sensitivity to bacterial flagellin in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant J 18: 277284[CrossRef][Web of Science][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][Web of Science][Medline]
Gray WM, Hellmann H, Dharmasiri S, Estelle M (2002) Role of the Arabidopsis RING-H2 protein RBX1 in RUB modification and SCF function. Plant Cell 14: 21372144 Gray WM, Kepinski S, Rouse D, Leyser O, Estelle M (2001) Auxin regulates SCF(TIR1)-dependent degradation of AUX/IAA proteins. Nature 4414: 271276
Gray WM, Muskett PR, Chuang H-W, Parker JE (2003) Arabidopsis SGT1b is required for SCFTIR1-mediated auxin response. Plant Cell 15: 13101319
Guttman DS, Vinatzer BA, Sarkar SF, Ranall MV, Kettler G, Greenberg JT (2002) A functional screen for the type III (Hrp) secretome of the plant pathogen Pseudomonas syringae. Science 295: 17221726
Hammond-Kosack KE, Tang SJ, Harrison K, Jones JDG (1998) The tomato Cf-9 disease resistance gene functions in tobacco and potato to confer responsiveness to the fungal avirulence gene product Avr9. Plant Cell 10: 12511266
Hauck P, Thilmony R, He SY (2003) A Pseudomonas syringae type III effector suppresses cell wall-based extracellular defense in susceptible Arabidopsis plants. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100: 85778582 Hayashi F, Smith KD, Ozinsky A, Hawn TR, Yi EC, Goodlett DR, Eng JK, Akira S, Underhill DM, Aderem A (2001) The innate immune response to bacterial flagellin is mediated by Toll-like receptor 5. Nature 410: 10991103[CrossRef][Medline]
Huynh TV, Dahlbeck D, Staskawicz BJ (1989) Bacterial blight of soybean: regulation of a pathogen gene determining host cultivar specificity. Science 245: 13741377
Innes RW, Bent AF, Kunkel B-N, Bisgrove SR, Staskawicz BJ (1993) Molecular analysis of avirulence gene avrRpt2 and identification of a putative regulatory sequence common to all known Pseudomonas syringae avirulence genes. J Bacteriol 175: 48594869
Jakobek JL, Lindgren PB (1993) Generalized induction of defense responses in bean is not correlated with the induction of the hypersensitive reaction. Plant Cell 5: 4956
Jakobek JL, Smith JA, Lindgren PB (1993) Suppression of bean defense responses by Pseudomonas syringae. Plant Cell 5: 5763 Janeway CA Jr, Medzhitov R (1998) Introduction: the role of innate immunity in the adaptive immune response. Semin Immunol 10: 349350[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Joosten MH, Cozijnsen TJ, De Wit PJ (1994) Host resistance to a fungal tomato pathogen lost by a single base-pair change in an avirulence gene. Nature 367: 384386[CrossRef][Medline] Kang L, Li J, Zhao T, Xiao F, Tang X, Thilmony R, He SY, Zhou J-M (2003) Interplay of the Arabidopsis nonhost resistance gene NHO1 with bacterial virulence. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 18: 35193524 Karin M, Ben Neriah Y (2000) Phosphorylation meets ubiquitination: the control of NF-kappa B activity. Annu Rev Immunol 18: 621663[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Keen NT (1990) Gene-for-gene complementarity in plant-pathogen interactions. Annu Rev Genet 24: 447463[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Kipreos ET, Pagano M (2000) The F-box protein family. Genome Biol 1: 3002.13002.7
Kunkel BN, Bent AF, Dahlbeck D, Innes RW, Staskawicz BJ (1993) RPS2, an Arabidopsis disease resistance locus specifying recognition of Pseudomonas syringae strains expressing the avirulence gene avrRpt2. Plant Cell 5: 865875 Li X, Zhang Y, Clarke J, Li Y, Dong X (1999) Identification and cloning of a negative regulator of systemic acquired resistance, SNI1, through a screen for supressors of npr1-1. Cell 98: 329339[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Liu W-M, Mei R, Di X, Ryder TB, Hubbell E, Dee S, Webster TA, Harrington CA, Ho M-H, Bai J, et al. (2002) Analysis of high density expression microarrays with signed-rank call algorithms. Bioinformatics 18: 15931599
Lu M, Tang X, Zhou JM (2001) Arabidopsis NHO1 is required for general resistance against Pseudomonas bacteria. Plant Cell 13: 437447 Mackey D, Belkhadir Y, Alonso JM, Ecker JR, Dangl JL (2003) Arabidopsis RIN4 is a target of the type III virulent effector AvrRpt2 and modulates RPS2-mediated resistance. Cell 112: 379389[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Mackey D, Holt BF, Wiig A, Dangl JL (2002) RIN4 interacts with Pseudomonas synringae type III effector molecules and is required for RPM1-mediated disease resistance in Arabidopsis. Cell 108: 379389 Maleck K, Levine A, Eulgem T, Morgan A, Schmid J, Lawton KA, Dangl JL, Dietrich RA (2000) The transcriptome of Arabidopsis thaliana during systemic acquired resistance. Nat Genet 26: 403410[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Nühse TS, Peck SC, Hirt H, Boller T (2000) Microbial elicitors induce activation and dual phosphorylation of the Arabidopsis thaliana MAPK 6. J Biol Chem 275: 75217526 Nürnberger T, Brunner F (2002) Innate immunity in plants and animals: emerging parallels between the recognition of general elicitors and pathogen-associated molecular patterns. Curr Opin Plant Biol 5: 318324[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Ohi MD, Vander Kooi CW, Rosenberg JA, Chazin WJ, Gould KL (2003) Structural insights into the U-box, a domain associated with multi-ubiquitination. Nat Struct Biol 10: 250255[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Peart JR, Lu R, Sadanandom A, Malcuit I, Moffett P, Brice DC, Schauser L, Jaggard DA, Xiao S, Coleman MJ, et al. (2002) Ubiquitin ligase-associated protein SGT1 is required for host and nonhost disease resistance in plants. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99: 1086510869
Petnicki-Ocwieja T, Schneider DJ, Tam VC, Chancey ST, Shan L, Jamir Y, Schechter LM, Janes MD, Buell CR, Tang X (2002) Genomewide identification of proteins secreted by the Hrp type III protein secretion system of Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato DC3000. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99: 76527657 Ponting CP, Aravind L, Schultz J, Bork P, Koonin EV (1999) Eukaryotic signalling domain homologues in archaea and bacteria. Ancient ancestry and horizontal gene transfer. J Mol Biol 289: 729745[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Read MA, Brownell JE, Gladysheva TB, Hottelet M, Parent LA, Coggins MB, Pierce JW, Podust VN, Luo RS, Chau V, et al. (2000) Nedd8 modification of Cul-1 activates SCF
Robatzek S, Somssich IE (2002) Targets of AtWRKY6 regulation during plant senescence and pathogen defense. Genes Dev 16: 11391149
Romeis T, Piedras P, Jones JDG (2000) Resistance gene-dependent activation of a calcium-dependent protein kinase in the plant defense response. Plant Cell 12: 803816
Romeis T, Piedras P, Zhang S, Klessig DF, Hirt H, Jones JDG (1999) Rapid Avr9- and Cf-9-dependent activation of MAP kinases in tobacco cell cultures and leaves: convergence of resistance gene, elicitor, wound, and salicylate responses. Plant Cell 11: 273287 Salinas-Mondragon RE, Garciduenas-Pina C, Guzman P (1999) Early elicitor induction in members of a novel multigene family coding for highly related RING-H2 proteins in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Mol Biol 40: 579590[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Shiu SH, Bleecker AB (2001) Receptor-like kinases from Arabidopsis form a monophyletic gene family related to animal receptor kinases. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98: 1076310768
Silverman N, Maniatis T (2001) NF-kappaB signaling pathways in mammalian and insect innate immunity. Genes Dev 15: 23212342 Takai R, Matsuda N, Nakano A, Hasegawa K, Akimoto C, Shibuya N, Minami E (2002) EL5, a rice N-acetylchitooligosaccharide elicitor-responsive RING-H2 finger protein, is a ubiquitin ligase which functions in vitro in co-operation with an elicitor-responsive ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme, OsUBC5b. Plant J 30: 447455[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Tao Y, Xie Z, Chen W, Glazebrook J, Chang H-S, Han B, Zhu T, Zou G, Katagiri F (2003) Quantitative nature of Arabidopsis responses during compatible and incompatible interactions with the bacterial pathogen Pseudomonas syringae. Plant Cell 15: 317330 Ulevitch RJ, Tobias PS (1999) Recognition of gram-negative bacteria and endotoxin by the innate immune system. Curr Opin Immunol 11: 1922[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Van den Ackerveken GF, Van Kan JA, De Wit PJGM (1992) Molecular analysis of the avirulence gene avr9 of the fungal tomato pathogen Cladosporium fulvum fully supports the gene-for-gene hypothesis. Plant J 2: 359366[Web of Science][Medline]
Yoshimura S, Yamanouchi U, Katayose Y, Toki S, Wang ZX, Kono Kurata N, Yano M, Iwata N, Sasaki T (1998) Expression of Xa1, a bacterial blight-resistance gene in rice, is induced by bacterial inoculation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95: 16631668
Zhu T, Wang X (2000) Large-scale profiling of the Arabidopsis transcriptome. Plant Physiol 124: 14721476 Zipfel C, Robatzek S, Navarro L, Oakeley EJ, Jones JD, Felix G, Boller T (2004) Bacterial disease resistance in Arabidopsis through flagellin perception. Nature 428: 764767[CrossRef][Medline] Zwiesler-Vollick J, Plovanich-Jones AE, Nomura K, Bandyopadhyay S, Joardar V, Kunkel BN, He SY (2002) Identification of novel hrp-regulated genes through functional genomic analysis of the Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato DC3000 genome. Mol Microbiol 45: 12071218[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] This article has been cited by other articles:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ASPB Publications | PLANT PHYSIOLOGY® | THE PLANT CELL | |
|---|---|---|---|