Recent advances in plant immunity: recognition, signaling, response, and evolution

Innate immune system is employed by plants to defend against phytopathogenic microbes through specific perception of non-self molecules and subsequent initiation of resistance responses. Current researches elucidate that plants mostly rely on cell surface-located pattern recognition receptors (PRRs) and intracellular nucleotide-binding leucine-rich repeat proteins (NB-LRRs) to recognize pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) and effector proteins from microbial pathogens, initiating PAMP- and effector-triggered immunity (PTI and ETI), respectively. Some pathogenic bacterial effector proteins are usually secreted into plant cells and play a virulence function by suppressing plant PTI, implying an evolutionary process of plant immunity from PTI to ETI. In the past several years, a great progress has been achieved to reveal fascinating molecular mechanisms underlying the pathogenic recognition, resistance signaling transduction, and plant immunity evolution. Here, we summarized the latest breakthroughs about these topics, and offered an integral understanding of plant molecular immunity.     

Of PAMPs and effectors: the blurred PTI-ETI dichotomy

Typically, pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) are considered to be conserved throughout classes of microbes and to contribute to general microbial fitness, whereas effectors are species, race, or strain specific and contribute to pathogen virulence. Both types of molecule can trigger plant immunity, designated PAMP-triggered and effector-triggered immunity (PTI and ETI, respectively). However, not all microbial defense activators conform to the common distinction between PAMPs and effectors. For example, some effectors display wide distribution, while some PAMPs are rather narrowly conserved or contribute to pathogen virulence. As effectors may elicit defense responses and PAMPs may be required for virulence, single components cannot exclusively be referred to by one of the two terms. Therefore, we put forward that the distinction between PAMPs and effectors, between PAMP receptors and resistance proteins, and, therefore, also between PTI and ETI, cannot strictly be maintained. Rather, as illustrated by examples provided here, there is a continuum between PTI and ETI. We argue that plant resistance is determined by immune receptors that recognize appropriate ligands to activate defense, the amplitude of which is likely determined by the level required for effective immunity.     

Toward understanding of rice innate immunity against Magnaporthe oryzae

The blast fungus, Magnaporthe oryzae, causes serious disease on a wide variety of grasses including rice, wheat and barley. The recognition of pathogens is an amazing ability of plants including strategies for displacing virulence effectors through the adaption of both conserved and variable pathogen elicitors. The pathogen-associated molecular pattern (PAMP)-triggered immunity (PTI) and effector-triggered immunity (ETI) were reported as two main innate immune responses in plants, where PTI gives basal resistance and ETI confers durable resistance. The PTI consists of extracellular surface receptors that are able to recognize PAMPs. PAMPs detect microbial features such as fungal chitin that complete a vital function during the organism’s life. In contrast, ETI is mediated by intracellular receptor molecules containing nucleotide-binding (NB) and leucine rich repeat (LRR) domains that specifically recognize effector proteins produced by the pathogen. To enhance crop resistance, understanding the host resistance mechanisms against pathogen infection strategies and having a deeper knowledge of innate immunity system are essential. This review summarizes the recent advances on the molecular mechanism of innate immunity systems of rice against M. oryzae. The discussion will be centered on the latest success reported in plant–pathogen interactions and integrated defense responses in rice.     

Virus perception at the cell surface: revisiting the roles of receptor-like kinases as viral pattern recognition receptors

Activation of antiviral innate immune responses depends on the recognition of viral components or viral effectors by host receptors. This virus recognition system can activate two layers of host defence, pathogen-associated molecular pattern (PAMP)-triggered immunity (PTI) and effector-triggered immunity (ETI). While ETI has long been recognized as an efficient plant defence against viruses, the concept of antiviral PTI has only recently been integrated into virus–host interaction models, such as the RNA silencing-based defences that are triggered by viral dsRNA PAMPs produced during infection. Emerging evidence in the literature has included the classical PTI in the antiviral innate immune arsenal of plant cells. Therefore, our understanding of PAMPs has expanded to include not only classical PAMPS, such as bacterial flagellin or fungal chitin, but also virus-derived nucleic acids that may also activate PAMP recognition receptors like the well-documented phenomenon observed for mammalian viruses. In this review, we discuss the notion that plant viruses can activate classical PTI, leading to both unique antiviral responses and conserved antipathogen responses. We also present evidence that virus-derived nucleic acid PAMPs may elicit the NUCLEAR SHUTTLE PROTEIN-INTERACTING KINASE 1 (NIK1)-mediated antiviral signalling pathway that transduces an antiviral signal to suppress global host translation.     

Plant immunity: Evolutionary insights from PBS1, Pto and RIN4

Two layers of plant immune systems are used by plants to defend against phytopathogens. The first layer is pathogen-associate molecular patterns (PAMPs)-triggered immunity (PTI), which is activated by plant cell-surface pattern recognition receptors (PRRs) upon perception of microbe general elicitors. The second layer is effector-triggered immunity (ETI), which is initiated by specific recognition of pathogen type III secreted effectors (T3SEs) with plant intracellular resistance (R) proteins. Current opinions agree that ETI was evolved from PTI, and the impetus for the evolution of plant immunity is pathogen T3SEs, which exhibit virulence functions through blocking PTI, but show avirulence functions for triggering ETI. A decoy model was put forward and explained that the avirulence targets of pathogen T3SEs were evolved as decoys to compete with the virulence targets for binding with pathogen T3SEs. However, little direct evidence for the evolutionary mode has been offered. Here we reviewed the recent progresses about Pto, PBS1 and RIN4 to present our viewpoints about the evolution of plant immunity.Key words: plant immunity, evolution, Pto, PBS1, RIN4     

Plant targets for Pseudomonas syringae type III effectors: virulence targets or guarded decoys?

The phytopathogenic bacterium Pseudomonas syringae can suppress both pathogen-associated molecular pattern (PAMP)-triggered immunity (PTI) and effector-triggered immunity (ETI) by the injection of type III effector (T3E) proteins into host cells. T3Es achieve immune suppression using a variety of strategies including interference with immune receptor signaling, blocking RNA pathways and vesicle trafficking, and altering organelle function. T3Es can be recognized indirectly by resistance proteins monitoring specific T3E targets resulting in ETI. It is presently unclear whether the monitored targets represent bona fide virulence targets or guarded decoys. Extensive overlap between PTI and ETI signaling suggests that T3Es may suppress both pathways through common targets and by possessing multiple activities.     

寄主植物与病原菌免疫反应的分子遗传基础

近年来,大量的植物抗病基因和病原菌无毒基因被克隆,抗病基因和无毒基因的结构、功能及其互作关系的研究也取得重大进展。在植物中,由病原菌模式分子(pathogen-associated molecular patterns, PAMPs)引发的免疫反应(PAMP-triggered immunity, PTI)和由效应因子引发的免疫反应(effector-triggered immunity, ETI)是植物在长期进化过程中形成的两类抵抗病原物的机制。PTI反应主要通过细胞表面受体(patternrecognition receptors, PRRs)识别并结合PAMPs从而激活下游免疫反应,而在ETI反应中,则通过植物R基因(resistance gene,R)与病原菌无毒基因(avirulence gene, Avr)产物间的直接或间接相互作用来完成免疫反应。本文对植物PTI反应和ETI反应分别进行了概述,重点探讨了植物R基因与病原菌Avr基因之间的互作遗传机理,并对目前植物抗性分子遗传机制研究和抗病育种中的问题进行了探讨和展望。     

Expansion of pathogen recognition specificity in plants using pattern recognition receptors and artificially designed decoys

Pathogen/microbe-associated molecular patterns(PAMPs/MAMPs) are recognized by plant pattern recognition receptors(PRRs)localized on the cell surface to activate immune responses.This PAMP-triggered immunity(PTI) confers resistance to a broad range of pathogenic microbes and,therefore,has a great potential for genetically engineering broad-spectrum resistance by transferring PRRs across plant families.Pathogenic effectors secreted by phytopathogens often directly target and inhibit key components of PTI signaling pathways via diverse biochemical mechanisms.In some cases,plants have evolved to produce decoy proteins that mimic the direct virulence target,which senses the biochemical activities of pathogenic effectors.This kind of perception traps the effectors of erroneous targeting and results in the activation of effector-triggered immunity(ETI) instead of suppressing PTI.This mechanism suggests that artificially designed decoy proteins could be used to generate new recognition specificities in a particular plant.In this review,we summarize recent advances in research investigating PAMP recognition by PRRs and virulence effector surveillance by decoy proteins.Successful expansion of recognition specificities,conferred by the transgenic expression of EF-Tu receptor(EFR) and AvrPphB susceptible 1(PBS1) decoys,has highlighted the considerable potential of PRRs and artificially designed decoys to expand plant resistance spectra and the need to further identify novel PRRs and decoys.     

植物与病原微生物互作分子基础的研究进展

植物在与病原微生物共同进化过程中形成了复杂的免疫防卫体系。植物的先天免疫系统可大致分为两个层面。第一个层面的免疫基于细胞表面的模式识别受体对病原物相关分子模式的识别,该免疫过程被称为病原物相关分子模式触发的免疫(PAMP-triggered immunity,PTI),能帮助植物抵抗大部分病原微生物;第二个层面的免疫起始于细胞内部,主要依靠抗病基因编码的蛋白产物直接或间接识别病原微生物分泌的效应子并且激发防卫反应,来抵抗那些能够利用效应子抑制第一层面免疫的病原微生物,这一过程被称为效应子触发的免疫(Effector-triggered immunity,ETI)。这两个层面的免疫都是基于植物对"自我"及"非我"的识别,依靠MAPK级联等信号网络,将识别结果传递到细胞核内,调控相应基因的表达,做出适当的免疫应答。本文着重阐述了植物与病原微生物互作过程中不同层面的免疫反应所发生主要事件的分子基础及研究进展。     

Screening soybean cyst nematode effectors for their ability to suppress plant immunity

The soybean cyst nematode (SCN), Heterodera glycines, is one of the most destructive pathogens of soybeans. SCN is an obligate and sedentary parasite that transforms host plant root cells into an elaborate permanent feeding site, a syncytium. Formation and maintenance of a viable syncytium is an absolute requirement for nematode growth and reproduction. In turn, sensing pathogen attack, plants activate defence responses and may trigger programmed cell death at the sites of infection. For successful parasitism, H. glycines must suppress these host defence responses to establish and maintain viable syncytia. Similar to other pathogens, H. glycines engages in these molecular interactions with its host via effector proteins. The goal of this study was to conduct a comprehensive screen to identify H. glycines effectors that interfere with plant immune responses. We used Nicotiana benthamiana plants infected by Pseudomonas syringae and Pseudomonas fluorescens strains. Using these pathosystems, we screened 51 H. glycines effectors to identify candidates that could inhibit effector-triggered immunity (ETI) and/or pathogen-associated molecular pattern (PAMP)-triggered immunity (PTI). We identified three effectors as ETI suppressors and seven effectors as PTI suppressors. We also assessed expression modulation of plant immune marker genes as a function of these suppressors.     

Plum pox virus capsid protein suppresses plant pathogen‐associated molecular pattern (PAMP)‐triggered immunity

The perception of pathogen‐associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) by immune receptors launches defence mechanisms referred to as PAMP‐triggered immunity (PTI). Successful pathogens must suppress PTI pathways via the action of effectors to efficiently colonize their hosts. So far, plant PTI has been reported to be active against most classes of pathogens, except viruses, although this defence layer has been hypothesized recently as an active part of antiviral immunity which needs to be suppressed by viruses for infection success. Here, we report that Arabidopsis PTI genes are regulated upon infection by viruses and contribute to plant resistance to Plum pox virus (PPV). Our experiments further show that PPV suppresses two early PTI responses, the oxidative burst and marker gene expression, during Arabidopsis infection. In planta expression of PPV capsid protein (CP) was found to strongly impair these responses in Nicotiana benthamiana and Arabidopsis, revealing its PTI suppressor activity. In summary, we provide the first clear evidence that plant viruses acquired the ability to suppress PTI mechanisms via the action of effectors, highlighting a novel strategy employed by viruses to escape plant defences.     

Dynamics of Defense Responses and Cell Fate Change during Arabidopsis-Pseudomonas syringae Interactions

Plant-pathogen interactions involve sophisticated action and counteraction strategies from both parties. Plants can recognize pathogen derived molecules, such as conserved pathogen associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) and effector proteins, and subsequently activate PAMP-triggered immunity (PTI) and effector-triggered immunity (ETI), respectively. However, pathogens can evade such recognitions and suppress host immunity with effectors, causing effector-triggered susceptibility (ETS). The differences among PTI, ETS, and ETI have not been completely understood. Toward a better understanding of PTI, ETS, and ETI, we systematically examined various defense-related phenotypes of Arabidopsis infected with different Pseudomonas syringae pv. maculicola ES4326 strains, using the virulence strain DG3 to induce ETS, the avirulence strain DG34 that expresses avrRpm1 (recognized by the resistance protein RPM1) to induce ETI, and HrcC^- that lacks the type three secretion system to activate PTI. We found that plants infected with different strains displayed dynamic differences in the accumulation of the defense signaling molecule salicylic acid, expression of the defense marker gene PR1, cell death formation, and accumulation/localization of the reactive oxygen species, H₂O₂. The differences between PTI, ETS, and ETI are dependent on the doses of the strains used. These data support the quantitative nature of PTI, ETS, and ETI and they also reveal qualitative differences between PTI, ETS, and ETI. Interestingly, we observed the induction of large cells in the infected leaves, most obviously with HrcC^- at later infection stages. The enlarged cells have increased DNA content, suggesting a possible activation of endoreplication. Consistent with strong induction of abnormal cell growth by HrcC^-, we found that the PTI elicitor flg22 also activates abnormal cell growth, depending on a functional flg22-receptor FLS2. Thus, our study has revealed a comprehensive picture of dynamic changes of defense phenotypes and cell fate determination during Arabidopsis-P. syringae interactions, contributing to a better understanding of plant defense mechanisms.     

A Conserved Peptide Pattern from a Widespread Microbial Virulence Factor Triggers Pattern-Induced Immunity in Arabidopsis

Microbe- or host damage-derived patterns mediate activation of pattern-triggered immunity (PTI) in plants. Microbial virulence factor (effector)-triggered immunity (ETI) constitutes a second layer of plant protection against microbial attack. Various necrosis and ethylene-inducing peptide 1 (Nep1)-like proteins (NLPs) produced by bacterial, oomycete and fungal microbes are phytotoxic virulence factors that exert immunogenic activities through phytotoxin-induced host cell damage. We here show that multiple cytotoxic NLPs also carry a pattern of 20 amino acid residues (nlp20) that triggers immunity-associated plant defenses and immunity to microbial infection in Arabidopsis thaliana and related plant species with similar characteristics as the prototype pattern, bacterial flagellin. Characteristic differences in flagellin and nlp20 plant responses exist however, as nlp20s fail to trigger extracellular alkalinization in Arabidopsis cell suspensions and seedling growth inhibition. Immunogenic nlp20 peptide motifs are frequently found in bacterial, oomycete and fungal NLPs. Such an unusually broad taxonomic distribution within three phylogenetic kingdoms is unprecedented among microbe-derived triggers of immune responses in either metazoans or plants. Our findings suggest that cytotoxic NLPs carrying immunogenic nlp20 motifs trigger PTI in two ways as typical patterns and by inflicting host cell damage. We further propose that conserved structures within a microbial virulence factor might have driven the emergence of a plant pattern recognition system mediating PTI. As this is reminiscent of the evolution of immune receptors mediating ETI, our findings support the idea that there is a continuum between PTI and ETI.     

植物与病原微生物互作分子基础的研究进展

植物在与病原微生物共同进化过程中形成了复杂的免疫防卫体系。植物的先天免疫系统可大致分为两个层面。第一个层面的免疫基于细胞表面的模式识别受体对病原物相关分子模式的识别, 该免疫过程被称为病原物相关分子模式触发的免疫(PAMP-triggered immunity, PTI), 能帮助植物抵抗大部分病原微生物; 第二个层面的免疫起始于细胞内部, 主要依靠抗病基因编码的蛋白产物直接或间接识别病原微生物分泌的效应子并且激发防卫反应, 来抵抗那些能够利用效应子抑制第一层面免疫的病原微生物, 这一过程被称为效应子触发的免疫(Effector-triggered immunity, ETI)。这两个层面的免疫都是基于植物对“自我”及“非我”的识别, 依靠MAPK级联等信号网络, 将识别结果传递到细胞核内, 调控相应基因的表达, 做出适当的免疫应答。本文着重阐述了植物与病原微生物互作过程中不同层面的免疫反应所发生主要事件的分子基础及研究进展。     

A single region of the Phytophthora infestans avirulence effector Avr3b functions in both cell death induction and plant immunity suppression

As a destructive plant pathogen, Phytophthora infestans secretes diverse host-entering RxLR effectors to facilitate infection. One critical RxLR effector, PiAvr3b, not only induces effector-triggered immunity (ETI), which is associated with the potato resistance protein StR3b, but also suppresses pathogen-associated molecular pattern (PAMP)-triggered immunity (PTI). To date, the molecular basis underlying such dual activities remains unknown. Based on phylogenetic analysis of global P. infestans isolates, we found two PiAvr3b isoforms that differ by three amino acids. Despite this sequence variation, the two isoforms retain the same properties in activating the StR3b-mediated hypersensitive response (HR) and inhibiting necrosis induced by three PAMPs (PiNpp, PiINF1, and PsXeg1) and an RxLR effector (Pi10232). Using a combined mutagenesis approach, we found that the dual activities of PiAvr3b were tightly linked and determined by 88 amino acids at the C-terminus. We further determined that either the W60 or the E134 residue of PiAvr3b was essential for triggering StR3b-associated HR and inhibiting PiNpp- and Pi10232-associated necrosis, while the S99 residue partially contributed to PTI suppression. Additionally, nuclear localization of PiAvr3b was required to stimulate HR and suppress PTI, but not to inhibit Pi10232-associated cell death. Our study revealed that PiAvr3b suppresses the plant immune response at different subcellular locations and provides an example in which a single amino acid of an RxLR effector links ETI induction and cell death suppression.     

Role of pathogen's effectors in understanding host-pathogen interaction

Pathogens can pose challenges to plant growth and development at various stages of their life cycle. Two interconnected defense strategies prevent the growth of pathogens in plants, i.e., molecular patterns triggered immunity (PTI) and pathogenic effector-triggered immunity (ETI) that often provides resistance when PTI no longer functions as a result of pathogenic effectors. Plants may trigger an ETI defense response by directly or indirectly detecting pathogen effectors via their resistance proteins. A typical resistance protein is a nucleotide-binding receptor with leucine-rich sequences (NLRs) that undergo structural changes as they recognize their effectors and form associations with other NLRs. As a result of dimerization or oligomerization, downstream components activate “helper” NLRs, resulting in a response to ETI. It was thought that ETI is highly dependent on PTI. However, recent studies have found that ETI and PTI have symbiotic crosstalk, and both work together to create a robust system of plant defense. In this article, we have summarized the recent advances in understanding the plant's early immune response, its components, and how they cooperate in innate defense mechanisms. Moreover, we have provided the current perspective on engineering strategies for crop protection based on up-to-date knowledge.     

Host-microbe interactions: shaping the evolution of the plant immune response

The evolution of the plant immune response has culminated in a highly effective defense system that is able to resist potential attack by microbial pathogens. The primary immune response is referred to as PAMP-triggered immunity (PTI) and has evolved to recognize common features of microbial pathogens. In the coevolution of host-microbe interactions, pathogens acquired the ability to deliver effector proteins to the plant cell to suppress PTI, allowing pathogen growth and disease. In response to the delivery of pathogen effector proteins, plants acquired surveillance proteins (R proteins) to either directly or indirectly monitor the presence of the pathogen effector proteins. In this review, taking an evolutionary perspective, we highlight important discoveries over the last decade about the plant immune response.     

水稻免疫机制研究进展

植物先天免疫主要由两部分组成：一类是通过细胞膜上的病原菌分子模式识别受体识别病原微生物表面存在的分子特征激发的免疫反应（PTI）;另一类是专化性的抗病R蛋白识别病原微生物的效应蛋白,从而激发下游的病原菌小种特异性的防卫反应过程（ETI）．随着水稻抗病信号途径中越来越多的抗病基因以及关键的调控基因被克隆和功能鉴定,同时多种水稻病原菌效应蛋白的发现,水稻抗病机理的研究也越来越深入．本文阐述了水稻的PTI,ETI及其下游参与免疫信号转导的关键性组分,从而形成一个初步的水稻免疫调控网络．     

Disruption of PAMP-induced MAP kinase cascade by a Pseudomonas syringae effector activates plant immunity mediated by the NB-LRR protein SUMM2

Pathogen-associated molecular pattern (PAMP)-triggered immunity (PTI) serves as a primary plant defense response against microbial pathogens, with MEKK1, MKK1/MKK2, and MPK4 functioning as a MAP kinase cascade downstream of PAMP receptors. Plant Resistance (R) proteins sense specific pathogen effectors to initiate a second defense mechanism, termed effector-triggered immunity (ETI). In a screen for suppressors of the mkk1 mkk2 autoimmune phenotype, we identify the nucleotide-binding leucine-rich repeat (NB-LRR) protein SUMM2 and find that the MEKK1-MKK1/MKK2-MPK4 cascade negatively regulates SUMM2-mediated immunity. Further, the MEKK1-MKK1/MKK2-MPK4 cascade positively regulates basal defense targeted by the Pseudomonas syringae pathogenic effector HopAI1, which inhibits MPK4 kinase activity. Inactivation of MPK4 by HopAI1 results in activation of SUMM2-mediated defense responses. Our data suggest that SUMM2 is an R protein that becomes active when the MEKK1-MKK1/MKK2-MPK4 cascade is disrupted by pathogens, supporting the hypothesis that R proteins evolved to protect plants when microbial effectors suppress basal resistance.