| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
|
First published online August 12, 2009; 10.1104/pp.109.143487 Plant Physiology 151:559-573 (2009) © 2009 American Society of Plant Biologists OPEN ACCESS ARTICLE
Multiple Antibiotic Resistance in Arabidopsis Is Conferred by Mutations in a Chloroplast-Localized Transport Protein[C],[W],[OA]Section of Molecular Cell and Developmental Biology, Institute for Cellular and Molecular Biology, University of Texas, Austin, Texas 78712 (S.C., A.L.); and Department of Genetics, Cambridge University, Cambridge CB2 3EH, United Kingdom (D.S., I.F.)
Widespread antibiotic resistance is a major public health concern, and plants represent an emerging antibiotic exposure route. Recent studies indicate that crop plants fertilized with antibiotic-laden animal manure accumulate antibiotics; however, the molecular mechanisms of antibiotic entry and subcellular partitioning within plant cells remain unknown. Here, we report that mutations in the Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) locus Multiple Antibiotic Resistance1 (MAR1) confer resistance, while MAR1 overexpression causes hypersensitivity to multiple aminoglycoside antibiotics. Additionally, yeast expressing MAR1 are hypersensitive to the aminoglycoside G418. MAR1 encodes a protein with 11 putative transmembrane domains with low similarity to ferroportin1 from Danio rerio. A MAR1:yellow fluorescent protein fusion localizes to the chloroplast, and chloroplasts from plants overexpressing MAR1 accumulate more of the aminoglycoside gentamicin, while mar1-1 mutant chloroplasts accumulate less than the wild type. MAR1 overexpression lines are slightly chlorotic, and chlorosis is rescued by exogenous iron. MAR1 expression is also down-regulated by low iron. These data suggest that MAR1 is a plastid transporter that is likely to be involved in cellular iron homeostasis and allows opportunistic entry of multiple antibiotics into the chloroplast.
The amount of antibiotics used nontherapeutically in agriculture is estimated to be 8 times greater than the amount used in all of human medicine (Mellon et al., 2001  ) and accounts for about 70% of total antibiotic use in the United States (Florini et al., 2005). It is also estimated that approximately 75% of antibiotics are not absorbed in the gut and are excreted largely unchanged (Mackie et al., 2006; Sarmah et al., 2006). Many of these antibiotics retain activity in soil for long periods of time (Chander et al., 2005). Agricultural crops are routinely fertilized with livestock waste, which has led to widespread antibiotic contamination of the environment and contributed to the selection of resistant bacteria, threatening human health. Two obvious reservoirs of residual antibiotics in the environment are farm soil and groundwater, and recent studies have shown that crop plants accumulate antibiotics after growth on antibiotic-contaminated soils (Kumar et al., 2005; Boxall et al., 2006). This poses a public health concern, as continual, low-level exposure to antibiotics through produce consumption may foster the development of resistant bacteria (Hocquet et al., 2003). Despite concerns, virtually nothing is known about how plants are capable of taking up and distributing antibiotics, both within the plant body and on a subcellular level.
Endogenous mechanisms of antibiotic resistance in plants have not been well studied. Multiple drug resistance in bacteria is often conferred by multidrug efflux transporters encompassing several families, including (but not limited to) the ATP-binding cassette transporters, the major facilitator superfamily, and the multidrug and toxic compounds efflux family (Paulsen, 2003
The sensitivity of plants to antibiotics that target prokaryotic translational machinery, such as spectinomycin, tetracycline, lincomycin, and the aminoglycosides, is attributed to the similarity of chloroplast ribosomes to bacterial ribosomes (Ellis, 1970 Here, we refer to RTS3 as Multiple Antibiotic Resistance1 (MAR1). Both a single nucleotide change (mar1-1) and two independent T-DNA insertions (mar1-2 and mar1-3) are able to confer resistance, which is highly specific to aminoglycosides that affect prokaryotic translational machinery. This resistance does not extend to antibiotics of other classes or to aminoglycosides that affect eukaryotic translational machinery. MAR1 is most likely a chloroplast envelope protein and appears to be a means by which antibiotics are able to opportunistically access their intracellular targets in a plant system. While the natural function of MAR1 remains unknown, our preliminary experiments indicate that it may play a role in cellular iron homeostasis.
Isolation and Map-Based Cloning of the Multiple Antibiotic Resistant Mutant mar1-1
mar1-1 was generated via ethyl methanesulfonate (EMS) mutagenesis and was found to be resistant to several aminoglycoside antibiotics, including kanamycin, streptomycin, gentamicin, amikacin, tobramycin, and apramycin (Fig. 1, A and B
). Interestingly, mar1-1 was not found to be resistant to the aminoglycosides hygromycin, G418, or paromomycin (Supplemental Figs. S1 and S2). These compounds, while structurally similar to other aminoglycosides, are distinct in that they inhibit both prokaryotic and eukaryotic protein synthesis (Eustice and Wilhelm, 1984
A backcross of mar1-1 to the wild type revealed that the mutation is nuclear and monogenic. The mutant locus was isolated via map-based cloning. A single nucleotide change (C to T) was found in the 10th exon of the locus At5g26820 (Fig. 2A ), which is annotated as having low similarity to ferroportin1 from Danio rerio. At5g26820 has been described as AtIREG3 based on sequence similarity to AtIREG1 and AtIREG2, two iron-regulated transporters in Arabidopsis (Schaaf et al., 2006 ). More recently, it has been described as RTS3, and two mutations in the gene (rts3-1 and rts3-2; Fig. 2, A and B) were shown to confer kanamycin resistance at 40 mg/L (Aufsatz et al., 2009).
Native expression of At5g26820 was able to complement the mutant mar1-1 (data not shown). Here, we will refer to At5g26820 as MAR1 since the gene name RTS3 does not accurately describe the functionalities we have uncovered for At5g26820. The single nucleotide change in mar1-1 leads to a single amino acid change (Ala to Val) at position 441 in the protein (A441V; Fig. 2B). This particular Ala residue lies in the middle of a putative transmembrane domain of the protein and is highly conserved among MAR1 homologs (Fig. 2C).
As mentioned earlier, MAR1 has only two homologs in Arabidopsis, AtIREG1 (At2g38460) and AtIREG2 (At5g03570). However, there are three MAR1 homologs in rice (Oryza sativa; Os12g3570, Os05g04120, and Os06g36450) and two homologs in grape (Vitis vinifera; A5AS54 and A5BT51). MAR1 is more closely related to rice homologs that are predicted to be chloroplast localized (Os12g37530 and Os05g04120) and to its grape homolog that is predicted to function in secretory pathways (A5AS54; Fig. 2D; Schwacke et al., 2003
We obtained two T-DNA insertion lines for MAR1 (Salk_034189 and Salk_009286) from the Arabidopsis Biological Resource Center. We have designated Salk_034189 as mar1-2 and Salk_009286 as mar1-3. Both lines show an extreme reduction in MAR1 transcript, as measured by quantitative real-time PCR (Supplemental Fig. S3A), and both were found to be nearly phenotypically identical to mar1-1, with respect to antibiotic resistance (Fig. 1, A and C). Note that Salk lines are expected to be kanamycin and paromomycin resistant due to expression of nptII, but this does not lead to cross-resistance to other antibiotics, as illustrated by an unrelated kanamycin-resistant, nptII-expressing Salk insertion line (Salk_030942; Fig. 1, A and C).
Since the T-DNA insertion lines mar1-2 and mar1-3 phenocopy the EMS mutant mar1-1, and all mutations confer multiple antibiotic resistance, we hypothesized that overexpressing MAR1 would lead to the opposite phenotype: hypersensitivity to multiple antibiotics. We expressed the MAR1 genomic locus from start to stop codon under control of the 35S promoter of Cauliflower mosaic virus in wild-type plants and found that it did confer a phenotype of hypersensitivity to both kanamycin and gentamicin, based on severe chlorosis and stunted growth of seedlings (Fig. 3 , A and B). MAR1 expression in two independent 35S overexpression lines was found to be at least 48-fold higher than the wild type (Supplemental Fig. S3B).
To further confirm that mutations in At5g26820 are responsible for the phenotype of mar1, we expressed 35S::At5g26820(MAR1) in the mar1-1 background. Analysis of several independent transgenic lines revealed that this construct led to a reversal of the kanamycin resistance phenotype of mar1-1, i.e. mutant mar1-1 plants overexpressing MAR1 were found to be hypersensitive to kanamycin (Fig. 3C). Additionally, native expression of MAR1 in a mar1-2 background reverted the phenotype back to approximately wild-type levels of resistance (data not shown).
The ARAMEMNON plant membrane protein database (Schwacke et al., 2003
C-terminal and N-terminal translational fusions between full-length MAR1 cDNA and YFP were also expressed. In C-terminal fusions, YFP fluorescence was clearly associated with chloroplasts (Fig. 4, J–L), and in N-terminal fusions, fluorescence was cytoplasmic (Fig. 4, O and P). The MAR1-YFP C-terminal translational fusion described above was also used to transform plants. Expression of this fusion protein was able to complement the resistance phenotype of mar1-2 (data not shown). Leaves of these plants were examined by confocal microscopy (Fig. 5, A–L ) and compared to untransformed controls (Fig. 5, M–O). YFP fluorescence in transformed lines colocalized with chloroplast autofluorescence (Fig. 5, C, F, I, and L) and appeared particularly enhanced at the periphery of these organelles, indicating that MAR1 may be associated with the chloroplast envelope.
Expression of MAR1 in Yeast Confers Hypersensitivity to the Aminoglycoside G418 To further test the function of the MAR1 putative transport protein, we expressed this protein in the yeast strain BY4700 under control of the strong PGK promoter. Both wild-type and mar1-1 mutant alleles were used for these experiments. BY4700 was used because it is only slightly sensitive to the aminoglycoside G418 (authors' observations). Yeast expressing wild-type MAR1 were found to be hypersensitive to G418 when compared to empty vector controls (Fig. 6A ). Interestingly, yeast expressing the mutant allele mar1-1 were also hypersensitive, but to a lesser extent than the MAR1 yeast (Fig. 6A). To eliminate the possibility that hypersensitivity was due to a general toxicity effect, the experiment was repeated using varying concentrations of cycloheximide, which is highly toxic to yeast. No growth differences were seen, at any cycloheximide concentration, among yeast expressing either MAR1, mar1-1, or empty vector controls (Fig. 6B).
To ensure that MAR1 protein was being properly expressed, and to determine its localization pattern in yeast, we also expressed a GFP-tagged version of MAR1. Yeast expressing MAR1-GFP were hypersensitive to G418, indicating functionality of the fusion protein (data not shown). While GFP alone was clearly cytoplasmic (Fig. 6D), GFP-tagged MAR1 localized to the yeast mitochondria (Fig. 6C), which is typical for chloroplast membrane proteins expressed in yeast (Versaw and Harrison, 2002 ; Jeong et al., 2008). Since the aminoglycoside G418 acts on both prokaryotic and eukaryotic ribosomes (Vicens and Westhof, 2003), G418 is likely to be inhibiting yeast growth in MAR1-expressing strains by accumulating in mitochondria.
Since MAR1 was found to localize to the yeast mitochondria, we did an additional control using chloramphenicol, which is known to inhibit yeast mitochondrial translation (Ibrahim et al., 1974
Since MAR1 appeared to be a chloroplast-localized transport protein, and its disruption and overexpression caused antibiotic resistance and hypersensitivity, respectively, we decided to test its functionality as a transporter for antibiotics. To accomplish this, we developed both a short-term uptake assay using isolated chloroplasts and a longer-term uptake assay using whole seedlings. For short-term uptake, isolated chloroplasts were exposed to high levels of antibiotic (12.5 mg/mL) for short periods of time (1 and 5 min; Fig. 7A ). For longer-term uptake, whole seedlings were exposed to lower levels of antibiotic (70 mg/L) for 2 d (Fig. 7D). Excess antibiotic was washed away, and chloroplasts were lysed to release their antibiotic content. Lysates were then spotted onto nitrocellulose in dot-blot fashion (Fig. 7C) along with gentamicin standards (Fig. 7B), and gentamicin was detected via anti-gentamicin antibody. This allowed for a simple yet quantitative method for measuring the gentamicin content of chloroplasts; each dot was analyzed using the integrated density function of ImageJ64 to determine a relative intensity value, which correlated positively with the amount of antibiotic in the lysate.
In short-term uptake experiments with isolated chloroplasts, it was found that chloroplasts from mar1-1 mutant plants accumulated less gentamicin than wild-type (Landsberg erecta [Ler]) controls, while chloroplasts from MAR1 overexpressors accumulated the most gentamicin (Fig. 7, A and C). This experiment was performed a total of three independent times with the same result. In uptake experiments using whole seedlings, it was found that chloroplasts from mar1-1 and mar1-3 mutant seedlings accumulated less gentamicin than the wild-type (Columbia-0 [Col-0]) control (Fig. 7D). Evidence from these experiments demonstrates the role of MAR1 as a chloroplast-associated transporter that is capable of importing aminoglycoside antibiotic.
It is unlikely that evolutionary pressures would have selected for a means of entry for toxic antibiotics into plant chloroplasts. Therefore, we propose that MAR1 has a more conventional role in the plant, and the transport of antibiotics is an opportunistic effect. The expression pattern of MAR1 does not yield many clues as to its potential function. Promoter-reporter fusion experiments using MAR1::GUS transgenic plants demonstrated that MAR1 is expressed throughout the plant body in young seedlings (Supplemental Fig. S5, A and B). In addition, MAR1 appears to be fairly evenly expressed in most tissue types based on AtGenExpress data (Supplemental Fig. S5C). Given its sequence similarity to ferroportin, it is possible that MAR1 could be involved in some aspect of iron transport. In an attempt to test this possibility, we expressed MAR1 cDNA in the yeast double mutant fet3fet4, which is defective in low and high affinity iron uptake (Dix et al., 1994
A common symptom of iron deficiency in plants is chlorosis, since iron is essential for chlorophyll biosynthesis (Vert et al., 2002
One of the MAR1 homologs in Arabidopsis, AtIREG2, was found to be up-regulated under iron deficiency (Schaaf et al., 2006 ). With this in mind, we examined MAR1 for transcriptional changes under iron limitation and iron excess. Plants were grown in liquid culture for 14 d, and baseline tissue samples were taken before addition of either 600 µM Fe-EDTA (iron excess) or 300 µM ferrozine (iron limitation). We observed a 60% decrease in MAR1 expression after 4 d of growth under iron deficiency (Fig. 9A
), along with the expected up-regulation of Iron Regulated Transporter1 (IRT1; which encodes for a major high-affinity iron transporter) under similar conditions (Stacey et al., 2008). We also observed a down-regulation of MAR1 when plants were grown for 2 weeks on plates containing a lower concentration of ferrozine (100 µM; Fig. 9B). A subsequent increase in MAR1 transcription was not observed when iron levels were elevated for 4 d (Fig. 9C), despite the expected down-regulation of IRT1 under these conditions (Fig. 9C). Because the chlorosis of 35S::MAR1 can be rescued by excess iron, and MAR1 is down-regulated under limiting iron conditions, we postulate that MAR1 may play a role in iron chelation, storage, or sequestration.
We have uncovered a mutant, mar1-1, which was found to be resistant to multiple aminoglycoside antibiotics (Fig. 1, A and B) based on a single point mutation in a putative transporter gene (Fig. 2, A and B). The resistance of mar1-1 is highly specific for aminoglycosides that target prokaryotic translational machinery and does not extend even to the structurally similar aminocyclitol, spectinomycin (Fig. 1D). Thus, MAR1 is an example of a transporter capable of recognizing a very specific group of drugs. The change of Ala to Val in the mar1-1 protein, given its location in the middle of a predicted transmembrane domain and the residue's high level of conservation among homologs in Arabidopsis and other plants (Fig. 2C), is likely to be very important to the function of MAR1. Additionally, MAR1 homologs that do not have Ala at position 441 replace this residue with either Ser or Gly (Fig. 2C), two amino acids with small R-groups. It is therefore likely that the addition of two relatively bulky methyl groups at this position in the mar1-1 mutant protein is enough to substantially alter MAR1 function. The nearly identical phenotypes of mar1-1, mar1-2, and mar1-3 (Fig. 1, A and C) indicate that all alleles are probably hypomorphic mutations, and since all confer multiple resistance, the MAR1 transporter must be a means of entry for antibiotics. We confirmed this hypothesis by overexpressing MAR1 in both wild-type and mar1-1 backgrounds, which conferred hypersensitivity to multiple antibiotics (Fig. 3). Since G418 and hygromycin do not cause chlorosis in plants, we were not able to do chlorophyll assays to determine resistance/sensitivity. However, we tested a wide range of concentrations and examined seedlings closely for phenotypic differences. We saw no difference in growth between mar1-1 and wild-type Ler at any concentration (representative images are shown in Supplemental Fig. S1). Additionally, mar1-1 was not resistant to the aminoglycoside paromomycin and appeared just as sensitized as the wild-type Col-0 (Supplemental Fig. S2), while plants expressing NPTII do show significant resistance (Supplemental Fig. S2, bottom row).
Since mar1 mutants are sensitive to those particular aminoglycoside antibiotics that act in the cell cytoplasm (hygromycin, G418, and paromomycin; Supplemental Figs. S1 and S2) but resistant to those that act only in the chloroplast (kanamycin, tobramycin, gentamicin, streptomycin, amikacin, and apramycin; Fig. 1A), we would predict that these mutations act to keep antibiotics out of the chloroplast. In support of this hypothesis, we have successfully demonstrated that MAR1-YFP fusions localize to the chloroplast in both protoplasts (Fig. 4) and whole plants (Fig. 5). Additionally, we have shown that the MAR1 transit peptide coupled to YFP delivers the fluorophore to the chloroplast stroma (Fig. 4, F–H), while the addition of YFP at the N terminus blocks proper localization of the transporter (Fig. 4, N–P). Since the transit peptide is the site of specific interactions with TIC (for Translocon at the Inner envelope membrane of Chloroplasts) and TOC (for Translocon at the Outer envelope membrane of Chloroplasts) complexes of the chloroplast envelope, it is likely that the addition of a bulky YFP fluorophore ahead of this domain may interfere with these interactions, which are necessary for import (Dixit et al., 2006 In the yeast strain BY4700, it was found that MAR1 localized to the mitochondria (Fig. 6C), and its expression caused a strong increase in sensitivity to G418 (Fig. 6A). The mutant allele mar1-1 also conferred sensitivity, albeit to a lesser extent. We hypothesize that the A-to-V mutation in mar1-1 causes a structural change in the transporter, such that its function is reduced. This reduced ability to function could be due to many factors, including reduced ability of the mutant transporter to bind or release substrate or reduced ability to bind or release a cotransported ion (such as Na+ or H+) used as an energy source for transport. Future experiments will enable us to distinguish between these and other possibilities.
To test the import function of MAR1 in a plant system, we performed uptake experiments using both isolated chloroplasts (Fig. 7A) and whole seedlings (Fig. 7D). To date, there is no report on uptake studies of aminoglycoside antibiotics in a plant system; therefore, no convenient assay was available. The assay developed here allows for inexpensive, nonradioactive detection of antibiotic and is based on the ability of aminoglycosides to adsorb onto nitrocellulose membrane without the need for fixation (Mihelic-Rapp and Giebel, 1996
A recent article describes independent mutations of the MAR1 locus (At5g26820) that are sufficient to achieve kanamycin resistance in Arabidopsis (Aufsatz et al., 2009
The chlorosis phenotype of the MAR1 overexpression line gives insight into the natural function of the MAR1 protein. Since this phenotype is rescued by iron feeding (Fig. 8, A and C), MAR1 may play a role in the chelation, storage, and/or sequestration of iron. If so, we might expect a decrease of MAR1 transcript under iron limiting conditions, which is what was observed (Fig. 9, A and B). Under limiting conditions, we also saw the expected increase in the transcript of the major root iron transporter IRT1, which is highly up-regulated under iron limitation to increase the supply of iron to the plant cell (Eide et al., 1996
AtIREG1 was postulated to be involved in vessel loading of iron (Curie and Briat, 2003
NA plays a key role in iron homeostasis by ensuring iron solubility in the weakly alkaline environment of the plant cytoplasm (Douchkov et al., 2005
The chlorosis phenotype of 35S::MAR1 plants could be due to excess NA accumulating in the chloroplast, where it may sequester iron, creating the phenotype of iron deficiency. The phenotype observed in leaves of mature 35S::MAR1 plants is the opposite of that seen in plants lacking NA (such as chloronerva); instead of interveinal chlorosis in young tissues, chlorosis arises in the midvein and in older tissues. This unusual chlorosis pattern may be the result of a redistribution of the cytoplasmic NA pool to the chloroplast. This has the dual effect of restricting NA from performing its role in phloem transport of iron and other metals (von Wiren et al., 1999
It is well known that aminoglycosides mimic polyamines and can use their inward transport systems for entering both bacteria and eukaryotic cells (Van Bambeke et al., 2000
Both the chloroplast and mitochondria require metalloproteins for photosynthesis and respiration, respectively, though the question of how iron and other metals are allocated between the two organelles has not yet been addressed (Merchant et al., 2006 mar1 represents an interesting example of plant antibiotic resistance that is based on the restriction of antibiotic entry into a subcellular compartment. Knowledge about this process, and other processes of antibiotic entry, could enable the production of crop plants that are incapable of antibiotic accumulation, aid in development of phytoremediation strategies for decontamination of water and soils polluted with antibiotics, and further the development of new plant-based molecular markers. This work also contributes to our understanding of how plants interact with the antibiotics they encounter, both in the laboratory (where aminoglycosides such as kanamycin are used heavily to select for transgenics) and in the natural environment.
These data indicate that MAR1 is a transport protein likely to be located on the chloroplast envelope, which appears to be capable of subcellular transport of multiple aminoglycoside antibiotics (Fig. 10
). MAR1 is highly specific for aminoglycosides that act on prokaryotic translational machinery, since mar1 mutants are not resistant to antibiotics of other classes, including those that act specifically in the chloroplast (Ellis, 1970
Plant Materials and Growth Conditions
The original antibiotic resistant mutant, line E2-123 (mar1-1), was generated via EMS mutagenesis of line E2-6 (Ler background, antibiotic sensitive; Kilby et al., 1992 Plants were grown either in a growth room at 21°C, ambient humidity, under constant fluorescent illumination or on Petri dishes in a Percival chamber under similar conditions.
All constructs to be used in plant transformation experiments were transferred to Agrobacterium tumefaciens GV3101 via electroporation. Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) plants were transformed by Agrobacterium-mediated transformation using the floral dip method (Clough and Bent, 1998
A total of 608 kanamycin-resistant F2 progeny from a cross of the mar1-1 mutant (F2 minus T-DNA as described above) to Col-0 and the mar1-1 and Col-0 parents were genotyped using microsatellite loci polymorphic between Col-0 and Ler. Resistant seedlings were selected after 2 weeks of growth on MS media plus kanamycin (25 mg/L). Genotype data were analyzed using MetaPhor agarose gels (Cambrex) and by fragment analysis using the Applied Biosystems 3730 genetic analyzer and GeneMapper software. Additional details are available in Supplemental Materials and Methods S1.
All cloning was done using the Gateway system (Invitrogen). All attB-tailed PCR products were initially cloned into pDONR222 using BP Clonase and sequence verified before subcloning into various plant and yeast expression vectors (using LR Clonase) mentioned below.
The MAR1 locus (At5g26820) was amplified by PCR (TripleMaster PCR system; Eppendorf) from Ler (wild-type) genomic DNA using attB-tailed gene specific primers (Supplemental Table S1). MAR1 was then subcloned into the plant overexpression vector pB7WG2 (Karimi et al., 2002
MAR1 cDNA in vector pENTR/SD-DTOPO was obtained from the Arabidopsis Biological Resource Center stock center through The Arabidopsis Information Resource (www.arabidopsis.org, clone name: U16896). MAR1 cDNA was amplified by PCR from this vector using specific primers (Supplemental Table S1). MAR1 cDNA lacking a stop codon was subcloned into vector pH7YWG2 (Karimi et al., 2005
The first 162 nucleotides of MAR1 were amplified by PCR using specific primers (Supplemental Table S1). Vector pH7YWG2 (Karimi et al., 2005
Protoplasts were isolated from 20-d-old seedlings and transformed according to methods previously described (Weigel and Glazebrook, 2002
A Leica SP2 AOBS confocal laser scanning microscope was used for visualizing fluorescence images from Arabidopsis protoplasts and leaves. Excitation was at 514 nm, and the emission signal was collected between 525 and 590 nm for YFP fluorescence and between 622 and 700 nm for chlorophyll autofluorescence. Untransformed protoplasts and leaves were also examined as controls.
T-DNA insertion alleles were identified from the Salk Institute Genomic Analysis Laboratory collection. mar1-2 carries a T-DNA insertion in the 11th exon of At5g26820 (Salk_034189, position 9436545 on chromosome V). mar1-3 carries a T-DNA insertion in the 9th exon of At5g26820 (Salk_009286, position 9436095 on chromosome V). Lines were confirmed homozygous by PCR and by segregation analysis on kanamycin.
Titrations of the antibiotics kanamycin, gentamicin, streptomycin, tobramycin, amikacin, and apramycin were established to determine the concentration at which the greatest difference in resistance could be observed between the wild type and mutant mar1-1 when plated on MS media plus antibiotic. These concentrations were determined to be 25 mg/L kanamycin, 70 mg/L gentamicin, 75 mg/L streptomycin, 40 mg/L tobramycin, 100 mg/L amikacin, and 200 mg/L apramycin. Seeds of mutant lines mar1-1 and mar1-2 along with a corresponding wild-type line (Col x Ler, F4) and an unrelated kanamycin-resistant T-DNA insertion line (Salk_030942, which interrupts MYB5) were surface sterilized and plated onto MS media and MS plus antibiotic. After 48 h of vernalization, plates were moved to a 22°C incubator under constant light conditions for 14 d.
Chlorophyll was extracted and quantified in triplicate according to methods described previously (Porra et al., 1989
MAR1 and mar1-1 cDNAs were cloned into vector pVV214 (Van Mullem et al., 2003
Eight individual clones from each line (described above) were selected from –URA dropout plates and PCR checked for the presence of the transgene. BY4700 transformed with pVV214 alone served as a control. Of the positive clones, three were selected and grown overnight at 30°C in 5 mL of –URA liquid dropout media. Cultures were then standardized to 0.01 optical density (
MAR1 cDNA (with stop codon removed) was cloned into vector pAG426GPD-ccdB-EGFP (Addgene plasmid 14204) via the Gateway method, and the yeast strain BY4700 was transformed as described above. pAG426GPD-ccdB-EGFP alone was used as a control. A mixed population of transformed and untransformed cells was incubated in a 500 nM solution of MitoTracker Red CMXRos (Invitrogen) for 20 min at room temperature. A Leica SP2 AOBS confocal laser scanning microscope was used for visualizing fluorescence images. Excitation was at 514 nm, and the emission signal was collected between 525 and 540 nm for GFP fluorescence and between 600 and 650 nm for MitoTracker Red.
Intact chloroplasts were isolated basically according to previous methods (Weigel and Glazebrook, 2002 Chloroplasts were counted using a hemocytometer, and a standard number was used for each reaction (Fig. 7 legend). The uptake reaction buffer was HMS (50 mM HEPES-KOH [pH 8], 3 mM MgSO4, 0.3 M sorbitol; see Supplemental Materials and Methods S1) +10 mM carbonate +0.2% (w/v) BSA. Gentamicin was added to a final concentration of 12.5 mg/mL, and uptake reactions were carried out on a rotator in a Percival chamber under constant fluorescent illumination for given time periods (Fig. 7A). Negative controls were incubated in HMS uptake buffer without gentamicin. To stop the uptake reaction, tubes were spun at 1,000g for 2 min in a microcentrifuge, supernatant was decanted, and chloroplasts were washed with 500 µL HMS buffer. This was repeated for a total of three washes. Chloroplasts were then incubated in 150 µL CP lysis buffer (20 mM HEPES, pH 7.5, 5 mM KCl, 1.5 mM MgCl2, 10 mM dithiothreitol, 10% [v/v] glycerol, and 1% [w/v] polyvinylpyrrolidone) on ice for 1 h with occasional vortex. Supernatants were collected after centrifugation (3,000g for 5 min) and stored at –20°C until use in dot blot. Dot blots for antibiotic detection in chloroplast lysates were performed as follows: 2 µL of each lysate was spotted onto nitrocellulose membrane (pore size 0.2 µM) in triplicate (Fig. 7C), along with 2 µL of each of a set of standard gentamicin solutions (in CP lysis buffer) as positive controls (Fig. 6B). Spotted membranes were allowed to dry for 45 min before blocking with 1x phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), pH 7.4, + 0.05% (v/v) Tween 20 + 5% (w/v) nonfat dry milk. Blocking time was 1 h on a rotary shaker at room temperature. After the block, mouse anti-gentamicin antibody (AbCam) was applied (in blocking solution) at 1:1,000 dilution, and incubation was carried out at 4°C overnight. The membrane was then washed two times for 15 min each with PBS, three times for 15 min each with PBS + 0.05% (v/v) Tween 20, and one time for 15 min with PBS. Goat anti-mouse horseradish peroxidase-conjugated secondary antibody (Santa Cruz Biotechnology) was applied (in blocking solution) at a dilution of 1:5,000 and allowed to incubate for 1.5 h on a rotary shaker at room temperature. The above washes were then repeated. The membrane was allowed to incubate for 1 min in western Lighting Plus-ECL solution (Perkin-Elmer) before exposure to film (Kodak BIOMAX Light) for 10 s to 1 min. Images of developed film were analyzed using ImageJ64 (NIH). The image was inverted, and background was subtracted using a rolling ball radius between 60 to 80 pixels, depending on the blot (rolling ball radius should be equivalent to the size of the largest dot on the blot). The integrated density function was then used to measure the intensity of each dot. The average of three replicate dots (±SD) was graphed (Fig. 7A).
Approximately 2,000 seeds were sterilized for each line and vernalized for 2 d at 4°C in 100 mL volumes of liquid MS growth media. Flasks were then moved to a shaker in a Percival chamber (22°C, continuous fluorescent light). On day 11, the media were changed to fresh liquid MS. On day 13, gentamicin was added to a final concentration of 70 mg/L. On day 15, media were decanted and seedlings were washed with 300 mL of double distilled water. Chloroplasts were isolated from seedlings exactly as described above, and 3 x 108 chloroplasts from each line were lysed. The lysis protocol was the same as above, and dot blots were also performed as above, except that lysates were diluted 1:30 before spotting.
Seeds from Ler (wild type) were grown in Erlenmeyer flasks containing 200 mL liquid MS media supplemented with 1% Suc at 21°C under continuous white light on a shaker set to constant rpm in a Percival growth chamber. After 14 d of growth, several whole seedlings (roots and shoots) were removed, and RNA was extracted using the QIAgen RNeasy plant mini kit with on-column DNase treatment. Media were then supplemented with either 600 µM Fe-EDTA (iron excess) or 300 µM ferrozine (iron restriction), and remaining seedlings were allowed to incubate for a further 4 d. On day 4, RNA was extracted from remaining whole seedlings as above. RNA (4 µg) from each sample was used in 40-µL reverse transcription reactions containing 250 nM actin, IRT1, and MAR1 gene-specific reverse primers. For each target (actin, IRT1, and MAR1), five PCR reactions containing 400 nM primers and 2 µL of first-strand cDNA as a template were performed using SYBR green master mix (Applied Biosystems) and a spectrofluorometric thermal cycler (Applied Biosystems 7900HT). The comparative cycle threshold method was used to analyze the results (User Bulletin 2; Applied Biosystems PRISM sequence detection system). For gel-based reverse transcription-PCR, plants were grown for 2 weeks on plates containing 0 or 100 µM ferrozine. On day 14, whole seedling tissue (root and shoot) was harvested and RNA extracted as above. Two micrograms of RNA was used as a template for each cDNA reaction (containing both MAR1 and APRT primers), and equal amounts of cDNA reactions were loaded on a gel. Products were visualized with UV and ethidium bromide. Sequence data for MAR1 can be found in the GenBank data library under accession number At5g26820.
The following materials are available in the online version of this article.
We thank Enamul Huq and Greg Hatlestad for helpful discussions and for critically reading the manuscript, David Eide for providing fet3fet4, Antonio Gonzalez for assistance with protoplast isolation protocols, Angela Bardo for help with confocal microscopy, and Enamul Huq for providing pCL-eYFP-FL. Received June 26, 2009; accepted August 7, 2009; published August 12, 2009.
The author responsible for distribution of materials integral to the findings presented in this article in accordance with the policy described in the Instructions for Authors (www.plantphysiol.org) is: Alan Lloyd (lloyd{at}uts.cc.utexas.edu).
[C] Some figures in this article are displayed in color online but in black and white in the print edition.
[W] The online version of this article contains Web-only data.
[OA] Open access articles can be viewed online without a subscription. www.plantphysiol.org/cgi/doi/10.1104/pp.109.143487 * Corresponding author; e-mail conte{at}mail.utexas.edu.
Aronsson H, Jarvis P (2002) A simple method for isolating import-competent Arabidopsis chloroplasts. FEBS Lett 529: 215–220[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Aufsatz W, Nehlin L, Voronin V, Schmidt A, Matzke A, Matzke M (2009) A novel strategy for obtaining kanamycin resistance in Arabidopsis thaliana by silencing an endogenous gene encoding a putative chloroplast transporter. Biotechnol J 4: 224–229[CrossRef][Medline] Becker R, Fritz E, Manteuffel R (1995) Subcellular localization and characterization of excessive iron in the nicotianamine-less tomato mutant chloronerva. Plant Physiol 108: 269–275[Abstract] Boxall A, Johnson P, Smith E, Sinclair C, Stutt E, Levy L (2006) Uptake of veterinary medicines from soils into plants. J Agric Food Chem 54: 2288–2297[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Cassin G, Mari S, Curie C, Briat J, Czernic P (2009) Increased sensitivity to iron deficiency in Arabidopsis thaliana overaccumulating nicotianamine. J Exp Bot 60: 1249–1259 Chander Y, Kumar K, Goyal S, Gupta S (2005) Antibacterial activity of soil-bound antibiotics. J Environ Qual 34: 1952–1957 Chen Y, Wu X, Ling H, Yang W (2006) Transgenic expression of DwMYB2 impairs iron transport from root to shoot in Arabidopsis thaliana. Cell Res 16: 830–840[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Clough S, Bent A (1998) Floral dip: a simplified method for Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant J 16: 735–743[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Connolly E, Fett J, Guerinot M (2002) Expression of the IRT1 metal transporter is controlled by metals at the levels of transcript and protein accumulation. Plant Cell 14: 1347–1357 Curie C, Briat J (2003) Iron transport and signaling in plants. Annu Rev Plant Biol 54: 183–206[CrossRef][Medline] Dix D, Bridgham J, Broderius M, Byersdorfer C, Eide D (1994) The FET4 gene encodes the low affinity Fe(II) transport protein of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. J Biol Chem 269: 26092–26099 Dixit R, Cyr R, Gilroy S (2006) Using intrinsically fluorescent proteins for plant cell imaging. Plant J 45: 599–615[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Douchkov D, Gryczka C, Stephan U, Hell R, Baumlein H (2005) Ectopic expression of nicotianamine synthase genes results in improved iron accumulation and increased nickel tolerance in transgenic tobacco. Plant Cell Environ 28: 365–374[CrossRef] Durrett T, Gassmann W, Rogers E (2007) The FRD3-mediated efflux of citrate into the root vasculature is necessary for efficient iron translocation. Plant Physiol 144: 197–205 Eide D, Broderius M, Fett J, Guerinot M (1996) A novel iron-regulated metal transporter from plants identified by functional expression in yeast. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93: 5624–5628 Elble R (1992) A simple and efficient procedure for transformation of yeasts. Biotechniques 13: 18–20[Web of Science][Medline] Ellis R (1970) Further similarities between chloroplast and bacterial ribosomes. Planta 91: 329–335[CrossRef][Web of Science] Emanuelsson O, Nielsen H, von Heijne G (1999) ChloroP, a neural network-based method for predicting chloroplast transit peptides and their cleavage sites. Protein Sci 8: 978–984[Web of Science][Medline] Eustice D, Wilhelm J (1984) Mechanisms of action of aminoglycoside antibiotics in eucaryotic protein synthesis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 26: 53–60 Florini K, Denison R, Stiffler T, Fitzgerald T, Goldburg R (2005) Resistant Bugs and Antibiotic Drugs: State and County Estimates of Antibiotics in Agricultural Feed and Animal Waste. Environmental Defense, Washington, DC Fourcroy P, Vansuyt G, Kushnir S, Inze D, Briat J (2004) Iron-regulated expression of a cytosolic ascorbate peroxidase encoded by the APX1 gene in Arabidopsis seedlings. Plant Physiol 134: 605–613 Gaymard F, Boucherez J, Briat J (1996) Characterization of a ferritin mRNA from Arabidopsis thaliana accumulated in response to iron through an oxidative pathway independent of abscisic acid. Biochem J 318: 67–73[Web of Science][Medline] Haydon M, Cobbett C (2007) Transporters of ligands for essential metal ions in plants. New Phytol 174: 499–506[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Hell R, Stephan U (2003) Iron uptake, trafficking and homeostasis in plants. Planta 216: 541–551[Web of Science][Medline] Hocquet D, Vogne C, El Garch F, Vejux A, Gotoh N, Lee A, Lomovskaya O, Plesiat P (2003) MexXY-OprM efflux pump is necessary for adaptive resistance of Pseudomonas aeruginosa to aminoglycosides. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 47: 1371–1375 Hofmann N, Theg S (2005) Chloroplast outer membrane protein targeting and insertion. Trends Plant Sci 10: 450–457[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Ibrahim N, Burke J, Beattie D (1974) The sensitivity of rat liver and yeast mitochondrial ribosomes to inhibitors of protein synthesis. J Biol Chem 249: 6806–6811 Inaba T, Schnell D (2008) Protein trafficking to plastids: one theme, many variations. Biochem J 413: 15–28[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Jarvis P (2008) Targeting of nucleus-encoded proteins to chloroplasts in plants. New Phytol 179: 257–285[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Jeong J, Cohu C, Kerkeb L, Pilon M, Connolly E, Guerinot ML (2008) Chloroplast Fe(III) chelate reductase activity is essential for seedling viability under iron limiting conditions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105: 10619–10624 Karimi M, DeMeyer B, Hilson P (2005) Modular cloning and expression of tagged fluorescent protein in plant cells. Trends Plant Sci 10: 103–105[Web of Science][Medline] Karimi M, Inze D, Depicker A (2002) Gateway vectors for Agrobacterium-mediated plant transformation. Trends Plant Sci 7: 193–195[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Kasai K, Kanno T, Endo Y, Wakasa K, Tozawa Y (2004) Guanosine tetra- and pentaphosphate synthase activity in chloroplasts of a higher plant: association with 70S ribosomes and inhibition by tetracycline. Nucleic Acids Res 32: 5732–5741 Kavanagh TA, O'Driscoll KM, McCabe PF, Dix PJ (1994) Mutations conferring lincomycin, spectinomycin, and streptomycin resistance in Solanum nigrum are located in three different chloroplast genes. Mol Gen Genet 242: 675–680[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Kilby N, Leyser H, Furner I (1992) Promoter methylation and progressive transgene inactivation in Arabidopsis. Plant Mol Biol 20: 103–112[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Korshunova Y, Eide D, Clark W, Guerinot M, Pakrasi H (1999) The IRT1 protein from Arabidopsis thaliana is a metal transporter with a broad substrate range. Plant Mol Biol 40: 37–44[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Kumar K, Gupta S, Baidoo S, Chander Y, Rosen C (2005) Antibiotic uptake by plants from soil fertilized with animal manure. J Environ Qual 34: 2082–2085 Larkin MA, Blackshields G, Brown NP, Chenna R, McGettigan PA, McWilliam H, Valentin F, Wallace IM, Wilm A, Lopez R, et al (2007) ClustalW and ClustalX version 2. Bioinformatics 23: 2947–2948 Ling H, Koch G, Baumlein H, Ganal M (1999) Map-based cloning of chloronerva, a gene involved in iron uptake of higher plants encoding nicotianamine synthase. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96: 7098–7103 Mackie R, Koike S, Krapac I, Chee-Sanford J, Maxwell S, Aminov R (2006) Tetracycline residues and tetracycline resistance genes in groundwater impacted by swine production facilities. Anim Biotechnol 17: 157–176[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Mellon M, Benbrook C, Benbrook K (2001) Hogging It: Estimates of Antimicrobial Abuse in Livestock. UCS Publications, Cambridge, MA Mentewab A, Stewart CN Jr (2005) Overexpression of an Arabidopsis thaliana ABC transporter confers kanamycin resistance to transgenic plants. Nat Biotechnol 23: 1177–1180[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Merchant S, Allen M, Kropat J, Moseley J, Long J, Tottey S, Terauchi A (2006) Between a rock and a hard place: trace element nutrition in Chlamydomonas. Biochim Biophys Acta 1763: 578–594[Medline] Mihelic-Rapp M, Giebel W (1996) A new immunohistochemical method for the detection of gentamicin in inner ear fluid compartments. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 253: 411–416[Medline] Paulsen I (2003) Multidrug efflux pumps and resistance: regulation and evolution. Curr Opin Microbiol 6: 446–451[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Pich A, Manteuffel R, Hillmer S, Scholz G, Schmidt W (2001) Fe homeostasis in plant cells: does nicotianamine play multiple roles in the regulation of cytoplasmic Fe concentration? Planta 213: 967–976[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Porra R, Thompson W, Kriedemann P (1989) Determination of accurate extinction coefficients and simultaneous equations for assaying chlorophyll a and chlorophyll b extracted with 4 different solvents - verification of the concentration of the chlorophyll standards by atomic-absorption spectroscopy. Biochim Biophys Acta 975: 384–394 Ravet K, Touraine B, Boucherez J, Briat J, Gaymard F, Cellier F (2009) Ferritins control interaction between iron homeostasis and oxidative stress in Arabidopsis. Plant J 57: 400–412[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Recht M, Douthwaite S, Puglisi D (1999) Basis for prokaryotic specificity of action of aminoglycoside antibiotics. EMBO J 18: 3133–3138[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Rogers E, Eide D, Guerinot M (2000) Altered selectivity in an Arabidopsis metal transporter. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97: 12356–12360 Rosellini D, LaFayette P, Barone P, Veronesi F, Parrott W (2004) Kanamycin-resistant alfalfa has a point mutation in the 16S plastid rRNA. Plant Cell Rep 22: 774–779[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Sarmah A, Meyer M, Boxall A (2006) A global perspective on the use, sales, exposure pathways, occurrence, fate and effects of veterinary antibiotics (VAs) in the environment. Chemosphere 65: 725–759[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Schaaf G, Honsbein A, Meda A, Kirchner S, Wipf D, von Wiren N (2006) AtIREG2 encodes a tonoplast transport protein involved in iron-dependent nickel detoxification in Arabidopsis thaliana roots. J Biol Chem 281: 25532–25540 Scholar E, Pratt W (2000) The Antimicrobial Drugs, Ed 2. Oxford University Press, Oxford Schwacke R, Fischer K, Ketelsen B, Krupinska K, Krause K (2007) Comparative survey of plastid and mitochondrial targeting properties of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice. Mol Genet Genomics 277: 631–646[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Schwacke R, Schneider A, Van Der Graaff E, Fischer K, Catoni E, Desimone M, Frommer W, Flugge U, Kunze R (2003) ARAMEMNON, a novel database for Arabidopsis integral membrane proteins. Plant Physiol 131: 16–26 Stacey M, Patel A, McClain W, Mathieu M, Remley M, Rogers E, Gassmann W, Blevins D, Stacey G (2008) The Arabidopsis AtOPT3 protein functions in metal homeostasis and movement of iron to developing seeds. Plant Physiol 146: 589–601 Stephan U (1995) The plant-endogenous Fe(II)-chelator nicotianamine restricts the ferrochelatase activity of tomato chloroplasts. J Exp Bot 46: 531–537 Thomas C, Rajagopal A, Windsor B, Dudler R, Lloyd A, Roux S (2000) A role for ectophosphatase in xenobiotic resistance. Plant Cell 12: 519–533 Tognetti V, Zurbriggen M, Morandi E, Fillat M, Valle E, Hajirezaei M, Carrillo N (2007) Enhanced plant tolerance to iron starvation by functional substitution of chloroplast ferredoxin with a bacterial flavodoxin. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104: 11495–11500 Van Bambeke F, Balzi E, Tulkens P (2000) Antibiotic efflux pumps. Biochem Pharmacol 60: 457–470[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Van Mullem V, Wery M, DeBolle X, Vandenhaute J (2003) Construction of a set of Saccharomyces cerevisiae vectors designed for recombinational cloning. Yeast 20: 739–740[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Versaw W, Harrison M (2002) A chloroplast phosphate transporter, PHT2;1, influences allocation of phosphate within the plant and phosphate-starvation responses. Plant Cell 14: 1751–1766 Vert G, Grotz N, Dedaldechamp F, Gaymard F, Guerinot M, Briat J, Curie C (2002) IRT1, an Arabidopsis transporter essential for iron uptake from the soil and for plant growth. Plant Cell 14: 1223–1233 Vicens Q, Westhof E (2003) Crystal structure of geneticin bound to bacterial 16S ribosomal RNA A site oligonucleotide. J Mol Biol 326: 1175–1188[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] von Wiren N, Sukhbinder K, Suhkibar B, Briat J, Khodr H, Shioiri T, Leigh R, Hider R (1999) Nicotianamine chelates both FeIII and FeII. Implications for metal transport in plants. Plant Physiol 119: 1107–1114 Weber G, von Wiren N, Hayen H (2008) Investigation of ascorbate-mediated iron release from ferric phytosiderophores in the presence of nicotianamine. Biometals 21: 503–513[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Weigel D, Glazebrook J (2002) Arabidopsis: A Laboratory Manual. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY Windsor B, Roux SJ, Lloyd A (2003) Multiherbicide tolerance conferred by AtPgp1 and apyrase overexpression in Arabidopsis thaliana. Nat Biotechnol 21: 428–433[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Wintz H, Fox T, Wu Y, Feng V, Chen W, Chang H, Zhu T, Vulpe C (2003) Expression profiles of Arabidopsis thaliana in mineral deficiencies reveal novel transporters involved in metal homeostasis. J Biol Chem 278: 47644–47653 Wu W, Berkowitz G (1992) Stromal pH and photosynthesis are affected by electroneutral K+ and H+ exchange through chloroplast envelope ion channels. Plant Physiol 98: 666–672 Related articles in Plant Physiol.:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ASPB Publications | PLANT PHYSIOLOGY® | THE PLANT CELL | |
|---|---|---|---|
TOP
ABSTRACT
RESULTS
0) and fet3fet4 (DEY 1453; MAT
trp1 ura3 
600) before addition of various concentrations of G418 or cycloheximide (