Spore Density Determines Infection Strategy by the Plant Pathogenic Fungus Plectosphaerella cucumerina

Necrotrophic and biotrophic pathogens are resisted by different plant defenses. While necrotrophic pathogens are sensitive to jasmonic acid (JA)-dependent resistance, biotrophic pathogens are resisted by salicylic acid (SA)- and reactive oxygen species (ROS)-dependent resistance. Although many pathogens switch from biotrophy to necrotrophy during infection, little is known about the signals triggering this transition. This study is based on the observation that the early colonization pattern and symptom development by the ascomycete pathogen Plectosphaerella cucumerina (P. cucumerina) vary between inoculation methods. Using the Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) defense response as a proxy for infection strategy, we examined whether P. cucumerina alternates between hemibiotrophic and necrotrophic lifestyles, depending on initial spore density and distribution on the leaf surface. Untargeted metabolome analysis revealed profound differences in metabolic defense signatures upon different inoculation methods. Quantification of JA and SA, marker gene expression, and cell death confirmed that infection from high spore densities activates JA-dependent defenses with excessive cell death, while infection from low spore densities induces SA-dependent defenses with lower levels of cell death. Phenotyping of Arabidopsis mutants in JA, SA, and ROS signaling confirmed that P. cucumerina is differentially resisted by JA- and SA/ROS-dependent defenses, depending on initial spore density and distribution on the leaf. Furthermore, in situ staining for early callose deposition at the infection sites revealed that necrotrophy by P. cucumerina is associated with elevated host defense. We conclude that P. cucumerina adapts to early-acting plant defenses by switching from a hemibiotrophic to a necrotrophic infection program, thereby gaining an advantage of immunity-related cell death in the host.Plant pathogens are often classified as necrotrophic or biotrophic, depending on their infection strategy (Glazebrook, 2005; Nishimura and Dangl, 2010). Necrotrophic pathogens kill living host cells and use the decayed plant tissue as a substrate to colonize the plant, whereas biotrophic pathogens parasitize living plant cells by employing effector molecules that suppress the host immune system (Pel and Pieterse, 2013). Despite this binary classification, the majority of pathogenic microbes employ a hemibiotrophic infection strategy, which is characterized by an initial biotrophic phase followed by a necrotrophic infection strategy at later stages of infection (Perfect and Green, 2001). The pathogenic fungi Magnaporthe grisea, Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, and Mycosphaerella graminicola, the oomycete Phytophthora infestans, and the bacterial pathogen Pseudomonas syringae are examples of hemibiotrophic plant pathogens (Perfect and Green, 2001; Koeck et al., 2011; van Kan et al., 2014; Kabbage et al., 2015).Despite considerable progress in our understanding of plant resistance to necrotrophic and biotrophic pathogens (Glazebrook, 2005; Mengiste, 2012; Lai and Mengiste, 2013), recent debate highlights the dynamic and complex interplay between plant-pathogenic microbes and their hosts, which is raising concerns about the use of infection strategies as a static tool to classify plant pathogens. For instance, the fungal genus Botrytis is often labeled as an archetypal necrotroph, even though there is evidence that it can behave as an endophytic fungus with a biotrophic lifestyle (van Kan et al., 2014). The rice blast fungus Magnaporthe oryzae, which is often classified as a hemibiotrophic leaf pathogen (Perfect and Green, 2001; Koeck et al., 2011), can adopt a purely biotrophic lifestyle when infecting root tissues (Marcel et al., 2010). It remains unclear which signals are responsible for the switch from biotrophy to necrotrophy and whether these signals rely solely on the physiological state of the pathogen, or whether host-derived signals play a role as well (Kabbage et al., 2015).The plant hormones salicylic acid (SA) and jasmonic acid (JA) play a central role in the activation of plant defenses (Glazebrook, 2005; Pieterse et al., 2009, 2012). The first evidence that biotrophic and necrotrophic pathogens are resisted by different immune responses came from Thomma et al. (1998), who demonstrated that Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) genotypes impaired in SA signaling show enhanced susceptibility to the biotrophic pathogen Hyaloperonospora arabidopsidis (formerly known as Peronospora parastitica), while JA-insensitive genotypes were more susceptible to the necrotrophic fungus Alternaria brassicicola. In subsequent years, the differential effectiveness of SA- and JA-dependent defense mechanisms has been confirmed in different plant-pathogen interactions, while additional plant hormones, such as ethylene, abscisic acid (ABA), auxins, and cytokinins, have emerged as regulators of SA- and JA-dependent defenses (Bari and Jones, 2009; Cao et al., 2011; Pieterse et al., 2012). Moreover, SA- and JA-dependent defense pathways have been shown to act antagonistically on each other, which allows plants to prioritize an appropriate defense response to attack by biotrophic pathogens, necrotrophic pathogens, or herbivores (Koornneef and Pieterse, 2008; Pieterse et al., 2009; Verhage et al., 2010).In addition to plant hormones, reactive oxygen species (ROS) play an important regulatory role in plant defenses (Torres et al., 2006; Lehmann et al., 2015). Within minutes after the perception of pathogen-associated molecular patterns, NADPH oxidases and apoplastic peroxidases generate early ROS bursts (Torres et al., 2002; Daudi et al., 2012; O’Brien et al., 2012), which activate downstream defense signaling cascades (Apel and Hirt, 2004; Torres et al., 2006; Miller et al., 2009; Mittler et al., 2011; Lehmann et al., 2015). ROS play an important regulatory role in the deposition of callose (Luna et al., 2011; Pastor et al., 2013) and can also stimulate SA-dependent defenses (Chaouch et al., 2010; Yun and Chen, 2011; Wang et al., 2014; Mammarella et al., 2015). However, the spread of SA-induced apoptosis during hyperstimulation of the plant immune system is contained by the ROS-generating NADPH oxidase RBOHD (Torres et al., 2005), presumably to allow for the sufficient generation of SA-dependent defense signals from living cells that are adjacent to apoptotic cells. Nitric oxide (NO) plays an additional role in the regulation of SA/ROS-dependent defense (Trapet et al., 2015). This gaseous molecule can stimulate ROS production and cell death in the absence of SA while preventing excessive ROS production at high cellular SA levels via S-nitrosylation of RBOHD (Yun et al., 2011). Recently, it was shown that pathogen-induced accumulation of NO and ROS promotes the production of azelaic acid, a lipid derivative that primes distal plants for SA-dependent defenses (Wang et al., 2014). Hence, NO, ROS, and SA are intertwined in a complex regulatory network to mount local and systemic resistance against biotrophic pathogens. Interestingly, pathogens with a necrotrophic lifestyle can benefit from ROS/SA-dependent defenses and associated cell death (Govrin and Levine, 2000). For instance, Kabbage et al. (2013) demonstrated that S. sclerotiorum utilizes oxalic acid to repress oxidative defense signaling during initial biotrophic colonization, but it stimulates apoptosis at later stages to advance necrotrophic colonization. Moreover, SA-induced repression of JA-dependent resistance not only benefits necrotrophic pathogens but also hemibiotrophic pathogens after having switched from biotrophy to necrotrophy (Glazebrook, 2005; Pieterse et al., 2009, 2012).Plectosphaerella cucumerina ((P. cucumerina, anamorph Plectosporum tabacinum) anamorph Plectosporum tabacinum) is a filamentous ascomycete fungus that can survive saprophytically in soil by decomposing plant material (Palm et al., 1995). The fungus can cause sudden death and blight disease in a variety of crops (Chen et al., 1999; Harrington et al., 2000). Because P. cucumerina can infect Arabidopsis leaves, the P. cucumerina-Arabidopsis interaction has emerged as a popular model system in which to study plant defense reactions to necrotrophic fungi (Berrocal-Lobo et al., 2002; Ton and Mauch-Mani, 2004; Carlucci et al., 2012; Ramos et al., 2013). Various studies have shown that Arabidopsis deploys a wide range of inducible defense strategies against P. cucumerina, including JA-, SA-, ABA-, and auxin-dependent defenses, glucosinolates (Tierens et al., 2001; Sánchez-Vallet et al., 2010; Gamir et al., 2014; Pastor et al., 2014), callose deposition (García-Andrade et al., 2011; Gamir et al., 2012, 2014; Sánchez-Vallet et al., 2012), and ROS (Tierens et al., 2002; Sánchez-Vallet et al., 2010; Barna et al., 2012; Gamir et al., 2012, 2014; Pastor et al., 2014). Recent metabolomics studies have revealed large-scale metabolic changes in P. cucumerina-infected Arabidopsis, presumably to mobilize chemical defenses (Sánchez-Vallet et al., 2010; Gamir et al., 2014; Pastor et al., 2014). Furthermore, various chemical agents have been reported to induce resistance against P. cucumerina. These chemicals include β-amino-butyric acid, which primes callose deposition and SA-dependent defenses, benzothiadiazole (BTH or Bion; Görlach et al., 1996; Ton and Mauch-Mani, 2004), which activates SA-related defenses (Lawton et al., 1996; Ton and Mauch-Mani, 2004; Gamir et al., 2014; Luna et al., 2014), JA (Ton and Mauch-Mani, 2004), and ABA, which primes ROS and callose deposition (Ton and Mauch-Mani, 2004; Pastor et al., 2013). However, among all these studies, there is increasing controversy about the exact signaling pathways and defense responses contributing to plant resistance against P. cucumerina. While it is clear that JA and ethylene contribute to basal resistance against the fungus, the exact roles of SA, ABA, and ROS in P. cucumerina resistance vary between studies (Thomma et al., 1998; Ton and Mauch-Mani, 2004; Sánchez-Vallet et al., 2012; Gamir et al., 2014).This study is based on the observation that the disease phenotype during P. cucumerina infection differs according to the inoculation method used. We provide evidence that the fungus follows a hemibiotrophic infection strategy when infecting from relatively low spore densities on the leaf surface. By contrast, when challenged by localized host defense to relatively high spore densities, the fungus switches to a necrotrophic infection program. Our study has uncovered a novel strategy by which plant-pathogenic fungi can take advantage of the early immune response in the host plant.     

Plants Actively Avoid State Transitions upon Changes in Light Intensity: Role of Light-Harvesting Complex II Protein Dephosphorylation in High Light

Photosystem II (PSII) core and light-harvesting complex II (LHCII) proteins in plant chloroplasts undergo reversible phosphorylation upon changes in light intensity (being under control of redox-regulated STN7 and STN8 kinases and TAP38/PPH1 and PSII core phosphatases). Shift of plants from growth light to high light results in an increase of PSII core phosphorylation, whereas LHCII phosphorylation concomitantly decreases. Exactly the opposite takes place when plants are shifted to lower light intensity. Despite distinct changes occurring in thylakoid protein phosphorylation upon light intensity changes, the excitation balance between PSII and photosystem I remains unchanged. This differs drastically from the canonical-state transition model induced by artificial states 1 and 2 lights that concomitantly either dephosphorylate or phosphorylate, respectively, both the PSII core and LHCII phosphoproteins. Analysis of the kinase and phosphatase mutants revealed that TAP38/PPH1 phosphatase is crucial in preventing state transition upon increase in light intensity. Indeed, tap38/pph1 mutant revealed strong concomitant phosphorylation of both the PSII core and LHCII proteins upon transfer to high light, thus resembling the wild type under state 2 light. Coordinated function of thylakoid protein kinases and phosphatases is shown to secure balanced excitation energy for both photosystems by preventing state transitions upon changes in light intensity. Moreover, PROTON GRADIENT REGULATION5 (PGR5) is required for proper regulation of thylakoid protein kinases and phosphatases, and the pgr5 mutant mimics phenotypes of tap38/pph1. This shows that there is a close cooperation between the redox- and proton gradient-dependent regulatory mechanisms for proper function of the photosynthetic machinery.Photosynthetic light reactions take place in the chloroplast thylakoid membrane. Primary energy conversion reactions are performed by synchronized function of the two light energy-driven enzymes PSII and PSI. PSII uses excitation energy to split water into electrons and protons. PSII feeds electrons to the intersystem electron transfer chain (ETC) consisting of plastoquinone, cytochrome b₆f, and plastocyanin. PSI oxidizes the ETC in a light-driven reduction of NADP to NADPH. Light energy is collected by the light-harvesting antenna systems in the thylakoid membrane composed of specific pigment-protein complexes (light-harvesting complex I [LHCI] and LHCII). The majority of the light-absorbing pigments are bound to LHCII trimers that can serve the light harvesting of both photosystems (Galka et al., 2012; Kouřil et al., 2013; Wientjes et al., 2013b). Energy distribution from LHCII is regulated by protein phosphorylation (Bennett, 1979; Bennett et al., 1980; Allen et al., 1981) under control of the STN7 and STN8 kinases (Depège et al., 2003; Bellafiore et al., 2005; Bonardi et al., 2005; Vainonen et al., 2005) and the TAP38/PPH1 and Photosystem II Core Phosphatase (PBCP) phosphatases (Pribil et al., 2010; Shapiguzov et al., 2010; Samol et al., 2012). LHCII trimers are composed of LHCB1, LHCB2, and LHCB3 proteins, and in addition to reversible phosphorylation of LHCB1 and LHCB2, the protein composition of the LHCII trimers also affects the energy distribution from the light-harvesting system to photosystems (Damkjaer et al., 2009; Pietrzykowska et al., 2014). Most of the LHCII trimers are located in the PSII-rich grana membranes and PSII- and PSI-rich grana margins of the thylakoid membrane, and only a minor fraction resides in PSI- and ATP synthase-rich stroma lamellae (Tikkanen et al., 2008b; Suorsa et al., 2014). Both photosystems bind a small amount of LHCII trimers in biochemically isolatable PSII-LHCII and PSI-LHCII complexes (Pesaresi et al., 2009; Järvi et al., 2011; Caffarri et al., 2014). The large portion of the LHCII, however, does not form isolatable complexes with PSII or PSI, and therefore, it separates as free LHCII trimers upon biochemical fractionation of the thylakoid membrane by Suc gradient centrifugation or in native gel analyses (Caffarri et al., 2009; Järvi et al., 2011), the amount being dependent on the thylakoid isolation method. Nonetheless, in vivo, this major LHCII antenna fraction serves the light-harvesting function. This is based on the fact that fluorescence from free LHCII, peaking at 680 nm in 77-K fluorescence emission spectra, can only be detected when the energy transfer properties of the thylakoid membrane are disturbed by detergents (Grieco et al., 2015).Regulation of excitation energy distribution from LHCII to PSII and PSI has, for decades, been linked to LHCII phosphorylation and state transitions (Bennett, 1979; Bennett et al., 1980; Allen et al., 1981). It has been explained that a fraction of LHCII gets phosphorylated and migrates from PSII to PSI, which can be evidenced as increase in PSI cross section and was assigned as transition to state 2 (for review, see Allen, 2003; Rochaix et al., 2012). The LHCII proteins are, however, phosphorylated all over the thylakoid membrane (i.e. in the PSII- and LHCII-rich grana core) in grana margins containing PSII, LHCII, and PSI as well as in PSI-rich stroma lamellae also harboring PSII-LHCII, LHCII, and PSI-LHCII complexes in minor amounts (Tikkanen et al., 2008b; Grieco et al., 2012; Leoni et al., 2013; Wientjes et al., 2013a)—making the canonical-state transition theory inadequate to explain the physiological role of reversible LHCII phosphorylation (Tikkanen and Aro, 2014). Moreover, the traditional-state transition model is based on lateral segregation of PSII-LHCII and PSI-LHCI to different thylakoid domains. It, however, seems likely that PSII and PSI are energetically connected through a shared light-harvesting system composed of LHCII trimers (Grieco et al., 2015), and there is efficient excitation energy transfer between the two photosystems (Yokono et al., 2015). Nevertheless, it is clear that LHCII phosphorylation is a prerequisite to form an isolatable PSI-LHCII complex called the state transition complex (Pesaresi et al., 2009; Järvi et al., 2011). Existence of a minor state transition complex, however, does not explain why LHCII is phosphorylated all over the thylakoid membrane and how the energy transfer is regulated from the majority of LHCII antenna that is shared between PSII and PSI but does not form isolatable complexes with them (Grieco et al., 2015).Plants grown under any steady-state white light condition show the following characteristics of the thylakoid membrane: PSII core and LHCII phosphoproteins are moderately phosphorylated, phosphorylation takes place all over the thylakoid membrane, and the PSI-LHCII state transition complex is present (Järvi et al., 2011; Grieco et al., 2012; Wientjes et al., 2013b). Upon changes in the light intensity, the relative phosphorylation level between PSII core and LHCII phosphoproteins drastically changes (Rintamäki et al., 1997, 2000) in the timescale of 5 to 30 min. When light intensity increases, the PSII core protein phosphorylation increases, whereas the level of LHCII phosphorylation decreases. On the contrary, a decrease in light intensity decreases the phosphorylation level of PSII core proteins but strongly increases the phosphorylation of the LHCII proteins (Rintamäki et al., 1997, 2000). The presence and absence of the PSI-LHCII state transition complex correlate with LHCII phosphorylation (similar to the state transitions; Pesaresi et al., 2009; Wientjes et al., 2013b). Despite all of these changes in thylakoid protein phosphorylation, the relative excitation of PSII and PSI (i.e. the absorption cross section of PSII and PSI measured by 77-K fluorescence) remains nearly unchanged upon changes in white-light intensity (i.e. no state transitions can be observed despite massive differences in LHCII protein phosphorylation; Tikkanen et al., 2010).The existence of the opposing behaviors of PSII core and LHCII protein phosphorylation, as described above, has been known for more than 15 years (Rintamäki et al., 1997, 2000), but the physiological significance of this phenomenon has remained elusive. It is known that PSII core protein phosphorylation in high light (HL) facilitates the unpacking of PSII-LHCII complexes required for proper processing of the damaged PSII centers and thus, prevents oxidative damage of the photosynthetic machinery (Tikkanen et al., 2008a; Fristedt et al., 2009; Goral et al., 2010; Kirchhoff et al., 2011). It is also known that the damaged PSII core protein D1 needs to be dephosphorylated before its proteolytic degradation upon PSII turnover (Koivuniemi et al., 1995). There is, however, no coherent understanding available to explain why LHCII proteins are dephosphorylated upon exposure of plants to HL and PSII core proteins are dephosphorylated upon exposure to low light (LL).The above-described light quantity-dependent control of thylakoid protein phosphorylation drastically differs from the light quality-dependent protein phosphorylation (Tikkanen et al., 2010). State transitions are generally investigated by using different light qualities, preferentially exciting either PSI or PSII. State 1 light favors PSI excitation, leading to oxidation of the ETC and dephosphorylation of both the PSII core and LHCII proteins. State 2 light, in turn, preferentially excites PSII, leading to reduction of ETC and strong concomitant phosphorylation of both the PSII core and LHCII proteins (Haldrup et al., 2001). Shifts between states 1 and 2 lights induce state transitions, mechanisms that change the excitation between PSII and PSI (Murata and Sugahara, 1969; Murata, 2009). Similar to shifts between state lights, the shifts between LL and HL intensity also change the phosphorylation of the PSII core and LHCII proteins (Rintamäki et al., 1997, 2000). Importantly, the white-light intensity-induced changes in thylakoid protein phosphorylation do not change the excitation energy distribution between the two photosystems (Tikkanen et al., 2010). Despite this fundamental difference between the light quantity- and light quality-induced thylakoid protein phosphorylations, a common feature for both mechanisms is a strict requirement of LHCII phosphorylation for formation of the PSI-LHCII complex. However, it is worth noting that LHCII phosphorylation under state 2 light is not enough to induce the state 2 transition but that the P-LHCII docking proteins in the PSI complex are required (Lunde et al., 2000; Jensen et al., 2004; Zhang and Scheller, 2004; Leoni et al., 2013).Thylakoid protein phosphorylation is a dynamic redox-regulated process dependent on the interplay between two kinases (STN7 and STN8; Depège et al., 2003; Bellafiore et al., 2005; Bonardi et al., 2005; Vainonen et al., 2005) and two phosphatases (TAP38/PPH1 and PBCP; Pribil et al., 2010; Shapiguzov et al., 2010; Samol et al., 2012). Concerning the redox regulation mechanisms in vivo, only the LHCII kinase (STN7) has so far been thoroughly studied (Vener et al., 1997; Rintamäki et al., 2000; Lemeille et al., 2009). The STN7 kinase is considered as the LHCII kinase, and indeed, it phosphorylates the LHCB1 and LHCB2 proteins (Bellafiore et al., 2005; Bonardi et al., 2005; Tikkanen et al., 2006). In addition to this, STN7 takes part in the phosphorylation of PSII core proteins (Vainonen et al., 2005), especially in LL (Tikkanen et al., 2008b, 2010). The STN8 kinase is required for phosphorylation of PSII core proteins in HL but does not significantly participate in phosphorylation of LHCII (Bellafiore et al., 2005; Bonardi et al., 2005; Vainonen et al., 2005; Tikkanen et al., 2010). It has been shown that, in traditional state 1 condition, which oxidizes the ETC, the dephosphorylation of LHCII is dependent on TAP38/PPH1 phosphatase (Pribil et al., 2010; Shapiguzov et al., 2010), whereas the PSII core protein dephosphorylation is dependent on the PBCP phosphatase (Samol et al., 2012). However, it remains unresolved whether and how the TAP38/PPH1 and PBCP phosphatases are involved in the light intensity-dependent regulation of thylakoid protein phosphorylation typical for natural environments.Here, we have used the two kinase (stn7 and stn8) and the two phosphatase (tap38/pph1and pbcp) mutants of Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) to elucidate the individual roles of these enzymes in reversible thylakoid protein phosphorylation and distribution of excitation energy between PSII and PSI upon changes in light intensity. It is shown that the TAP38/PPH1-dependent, redox-regulated LHCII dephosphorylation is the key component to maintain excitation balance between PSII and PSI upon increase in light intensity, which at the same time, induces strong phosphorylation of the PSII core proteins. Collectively, reversible but opposite phosphorylation and dephosphorylation of the PSII core and LHCII proteins upon increase or decrease in light intensity are shown to be crucial for maintenance of even distribution of excitation energy to both photosystems, thus preventing state transitions. Moreover, evidence is provided indicating that the pH gradient across the thylakoid membrane is yet another important component in regulation of the distribution of excitation energy to PSII and PSI, possibly by affecting the regulation of thylakoid kinases and phosphatases.     

STATE TRANSITION7-Dependent Phosphorylation Is Modulated by Changing Environmental Conditions,and Its Absence Triggers Remodeling of Photosynthetic Protein Complexes

In plants and algae, the serine/threonine kinase STN7/STT7, orthologous protein kinases in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii and Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), respectively, is an important regulator in acclimation to changing light environments. In this work, we assessed STT7-dependent protein phosphorylation under high light in C. reinhardtii, known to fully induce the expression of LIGHT-HARVESTING COMPLEX STRESS-RELATED PROTEIN3 (LHCSR3) and a nonphotochemical quenching mechanism, in relationship to anoxia where the activity of cyclic electron flow is stimulated. Our quantitative proteomics data revealed numerous unique STT7 protein substrates and STT7-dependent protein phosphorylation variations that were reliant on the environmental condition. These results indicate that STT7-dependent phosphorylation is modulated by the environment and point to an intricate chloroplast phosphorylation network responding in a highly sensitive and dynamic manner to environmental cues and alterations in kinase function. Functionally, the absence of the STT7 kinase triggered changes in protein expression and photoinhibition of photosystem I (PSI) and resulted in the remodeling of photosynthetic complexes. This remodeling initiated a pronounced association of LHCSR3 with PSI-LIGHT HARVESTING COMPLEX I (LHCI)-ferredoxin-NADPH oxidoreductase supercomplexes. Lack of STT7 kinase strongly diminished PSII-LHCII supercomplexes, while PSII core complex phosphorylation and accumulation were significantly enhanced. In conclusion, our study provides strong evidence that the regulation of protein phosphorylation is critical for driving successful acclimation to high light and anoxic growth environments and gives new insights into acclimation strategies to these environmental conditions.Oxygenic photosynthesis converts solar energy into chemical energy. This energy is utilized for carbon dioxide assimilation, allowing the formation of complex organic material. Plant photosynthesis is performed by a series of reactions in and at the thylakoid membrane, resulting in light-dependent water oxidation, NADP reduction, and ATP formation (Whatley et al., 1963). These light reactions are catalyzed by two photosystems (PSI and PSII). A third multiprotein complex, also embedded in the thylakoid membrane, is the cytochrome b₆f (cyt b₆f) complex that links photosynthetic electron transfer processes between the two photosystems and functions in proton translocation. The ATP synthase takes advantage of the proton-motive force that is generated by the light reactions (Mitchell, 1961) to produce ATP. ATP and NADPH, generated through linear electron flow from PSII to PSI, drive the Calvin-Benson-Bassham cycle (Bassham et al., 1950) to fix CO₂. Alternatively, cyclic electron flow (CEF) between PSI and the cyt b₆f complex solely produces ATP (Arnon, 1959).Under normal growth conditions, CEF provides additionally required ATP for CO₂ fixation (Lucker and Kramer, 2013), counteracts overreduction of the PSI acceptor side under stressful environmental cues, and readjusts the ATP poise, leading to increased lumen acidification important for photoprotection (Alric, 2010; Peltier et al., 2010; Leister and Shikanai, 2013; Shikanai, 2014). In microalgae and vascular plants, CEF relies on the NAD(P)H dehydrogenase-dependent and/or PROTON GRADIENT REGULATION5 (PGR5)-related pathways (Munekage et al., 2002, 2004; Petroutsos et al., 2009; Tolleter et al., 2011; Johnson et al., 2014). For both pathways, supercomplexes consisting of PSI-LIGHT HARVESTING COMPLEX I (LHCI) and components of the respective electron transfer routes have been identified. In Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), a unique NAD(P)H dehydrogenase-PSI supercomplex with a molecular mass of more than 1,000 kD was discovered (Peng et al., 2008). From Chlamydomonas reinhardtii, Iwai et al. (2010) isolated a protein supercomplex composed of PSI-LHCI, LHCII, the cyt b₆/f complex, ferredoxin-NADPH oxidoreductase (FNR), and PROTON GRADIENT REGULATION-LIKE1 (PGRL1).PGRL1 and PGR5 interact physically in Arabidopsis and associate with PSI to allow the operation of CEF (DalCorso et al., 2008). Functional data suggest that PGRL1 might operate as a ferredoxin-plastoquinone reductase (Hertle et al., 2013). The PGRL1-containing CEF supercomplex isolated from C. reinhardtii is capable of CEF under in vitro conditions in the presence of exogenously added soluble plastocyanin and ferredoxin (Iwai et al., 2010). Terashima et al. (2012) isolated a CEF supercomplex of similar composition from anaerobic growth conditions that was active in vitro and contained proteins such as the chloroplast-localized Ca²⁺ sensor CAS and ANAEROBIC RESPONSE1 (ANR1), which were also shown to be functionally important for efficient CEF in the alga. Notably, it was suggested that the onset of CEF in C. reinhardtii is redox controlled (Takahashi et al., 2013).It has been demonstrated that efficient CEF is crucial for successful acclimation to excess light (Munekage et al., 2004; Dang et al., 2014; Johnson et al., 2014; Kukuczka et al., 2014). The most rapid response to excess light, however, relies on a mechanism called nonphotochemical quenching (NPQ). The fastest constituent of NPQ is energy-dependent (qE) quenching, which operates at a time scale of seconds to minutes and regulates the thermal dissipation of excess absorbed light energy, thereby providing effective photoprotection. In vascular plants, the PSII protein PSII SUBUNIT S is essential for qE (Li et al., 2000), whereas qE induction in the green alga C. reinhardtii is mediated by LIGHT-HARVESTING COMPLEX STRESS-RELATED PROTEIN3 (LHCSR3), an ancient light-harvesting protein that is missing in vascular plants (Peers et al., 2009). CEF and qE are complementary for acclimation to excess light, as double mutants deficient in both mechanisms possess additive phenotypes and are highly sensitive to light (Kukuczka et al., 2014). Another constituent of NPQ is the quenching by state transitions. State transitions are important to balance the excitation energy between PSI and PSII (Bonaventura and Myers, 1969; Murata, 1969). Under light conditions where PSII is preferentially excited, both PSII core and LHCII proteins become phosphorylated (Lemeille and Rochaix, 2010). As a consequence, phosphorylated LHCII proteins detach from PSII and partly connect to PSI (state 2). Under conditions where PSI excitation is predominant, this process is reversed. LHCII proteins are dephosphorylated and associate with PSII (state 1). The extent of state transition between vascular plants such as Arabidopsis and C. reinhardtii differs significantly. The proportion of mobile LHCII antenna is about 80% in the alga, whereas in Arabidopsis, only 15% to 20% of LHCII is transferred to PSI under state 2 conditions (Lemeille and Rochaix, 2010). However, the large increase in PSI antenna size in C. reinhardtii has recently been challenged (Nagy et al., 2014; Ünlü et al., 2014): while 70% to 80% of mobile LHCII detached from PSII in response to transition to state 2 conditions, only a fraction of about 20% functionally attached to PSI.Phosphorylation of LHC proteins requires the function of the STT7 kinase or its ortholog STN7 in C. reinhardtii or Arabidopsis, respectively. In the absence of the STT7/STN7 kinase, the initiation of state transitions is blocked (Depège et al., 2003; Bellafiore et al., 2005). The mobile LHCII fraction of C. reinhardtii includes the two monomeric minor LHCII antenna proteins, CP26 and CP29 (encoded by lhcb5 and lhcb4 genes), and the major chlorophyll a/b binding protein of LHCII, LHCBM5 (Takahashi et al., 2006), but also the LHCSR3 protein was suggested to migrate during state transitions (Allorent et al., 2013). Takahashi et al. (2014) suggested that only CP29 and LHCBM5 directly associate with PSI to form the PSI-LHCI-LHCII supercomplex, while the binding of CP26 could occur indirectly or via the other two proteins. However, it is not yet known whether STT7 directly phosphorylates the LHCII proteins or if this takes place as part of a kinase cascade (Rochaix, 2007). Nevertheless, the direct interaction between STT7 and the LHCII proteins is quite likely, since none of the other chloroplast kinases was found to be specifically required for LHCII phosphorylation (Rochaix, 2014). The activity of the STT7 kinase is mainly determined by the redox status of the plastoquinone pool (Vener et al., 1997; Zito et al., 1999). The identification of a PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE 2C (PP2C)-type phosphatase responsible for the dephosphorylation of the LHCII proteins in Arabidopsis has been described by two studies in parallel pointing to the fact that this enzyme, called PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE1/THYLAKOID-ASSOCIATED PHOSPHATASE38, acts directly on phosphorylated LHCII proteins, in particular when they are associated with the PSI-LHCI supercomplex (Pribil et al., 2010; Shapiguzov et al., 2010). Moreover, it is not known whether these phosphatases are constitutively active or if they are regulated by other means, for example through the redox state of the plastoquinone pool. Nonetheless, both enzymes are conserved in land plants and exhibit orthologous proteins in C. reinhardtii (Rochaix et al., 2012).Another kinase related to STN7/STT7 is encoded in the Arabidopsis and C. reinhardtii genomes and named STN8 and STATE TRANSITION-LIKE1 (STL1), respectively. STN8 is involved in PSII core subunit phosphorylation and influences the repair of PSII after photodamage (Bonardi et al., 2005; Vainonen et al., 2005). Remarkably, the disassembly of the PSII holocomplex is inhibited in STN7/STN8 double mutants (Tikkanen et al., 2008; Fristedt et al., 2009; Dietzel et al., 2011; Nath et al., 2013), suggesting that the phosphorylation of core subunits is required for PSII disassembly. It was further suggested that STN8 controls the transition between linear electron flow and CEF by the phosphorylation of PGRL1 in Arabidopsis (Reiland et al., 2011). As described for STN7, the activity of STN8 is probably regulated via the redox state of the plastoquinone pool (Bennett, 1991; Fristedt et al., 2009). Notably, the action of STN8 is counteracted by a chloroplast PP2C phosphatase (Samol et al., 2012), allowing for the fast reversibility of STN8-mediated acclimation responses. Thus, it appears that an intricate regulatory network of chloroplast protein kinases and phosphatases evolved in vascular plants and algae that drives the acclimation response to various environmental cues, including excess and changing light settings (Rochaix et al., 2012). As STN7/STT7 and STN8/STL1 kinase activities appear to be controlled by the redox poise of the plastoquinone pool, the plastoquinone pool would be a central player in these acclimation responses. On the other hand, the kinases themselves are subjected to phosphorylation (Reiland et al., 2009, 2011; Lemeille et al., 2010; Wang et al., 2013). However, the functional consequences of this phosphorylation are unknown.Recent comparative analyses revealed the presence of at least 15 distinct chloroplast protein kinases, suggesting an intricate kinase phosphorylation network in the chloroplast (Bayer et al., 2012). Generally, the phosphorylation of proteins is one of the most abundant posttranslational modifications. In complex eukaryotic systems, protein phosphorylation occurs most frequently on Ser followed by Thr residues, whereas protein phosphorylation of Tyr residues (1,800:200:1) is comparatively rare (Hunter, 1998; Mann et al., 2002). Protein phosphorylation is a general phenomenon in vivo; it is assumed that about one-third of all proteins are phosphorylated at a given time (Cohen, 2000; Ahn and Resing, 2001; Venter et al., 2001; Manning et al., 2002; Knight et al., 2003). A recent large-scale quantitative evaluation of human proteomic data strengthened the importance of protein phosphorylation for cellular function and human biology (Wilhelm et al., 2014). The C. reinhardtii and Arabidopsis genomes encode large kinase families (Arabidopsis Genome Initiative, 2000; Kerk et al., 2002; Merchant et al., 2007), supporting the view that protein phosphorylation also plays an important role in a plant’s life cycle. It is thus evident that the understanding of protein phosphorylation, including the specificity of residues phosphorylated or dephosphorylated in response to cellular as well as environmental factors, is one key to understanding the complex functional biological networks at the whole-system level. Likewise, it is crucial to design experimental setups allowing the linkage between phosphorylation events and particular physiological consequences to be elucidated.In this regard, we designed experiments to investigate STT7 kinase-dependent phosphorylation dynamics in C. reinhardtii in response to high light and anoxia, employing quantitative proteomics in conjunction with in-depth physiological characterization. These conditions are particularly interesting, as high light conditions are known to fully induce LHCSR3 protein expression and qE, while anoxia promotes CEF activity. Recently, it was demonstrated that qE and CEF are complementary and crucial in acclimation to these environmental cues (Kukuczka et al., 2014). Notably, LHCSR3 phosphorylation was suggested to depend on STT7 function (Bonente et al., 2011), while CEF supercomplex formation was found to be independent of STT7 kinase function (Takahashi et al., 2013), indicating that STT7 function might impact the acclimation to high light and anoxia in different ways. However, our quantitative proteomics and physiological data reveal that STT7-dependent variations in protein phosphorylation profiles have similar dramatic phenotypic consequences in both conditions, strongly suggesting that the regulation of protein phosphorylation is critical for driving successful acclimation to high light and anoxic growth environments.     

The Role of a Potassium Transporter OsHAK5 in Potassium Acquisition and Transport from Roots to Shoots in Rice at Low Potassium Supply Levels

In plants, K transporter (KT)/high affinity K transporter (HAK)/K uptake permease (KUP) is the largest potassium (K) transporter family; however, few of the members have had their physiological functions characterized in planta. Here, we studied OsHAK5 of the KT/HAK/KUP family in rice (Oryza sativa). We determined its cellular and tissue localization and analyzed its functions in rice using both OsHAK5 knockout mutants and overexpression lines in three genetic backgrounds. A β-glucuronidase reporter driven by the OsHAK5 native promoter indicated OsHAK5 expression in various tissue organs from root to seed, abundantly in root epidermis and stele, the vascular tissues, and mesophyll cells. Net K influx rate in roots and K transport from roots to aerial parts were severely impaired by OsHAK5 knockout but increased by OsHAK5 overexpression in 0.1 and 0.3 mm K external solution. The contribution of OsHAK5 to K mobilization within the rice plant was confirmed further by the change of K concentration in the xylem sap and K distribution in the transgenic lines when K was removed completely from the external solution. Overexpression of OsHAK5 increased the K-sodium concentration ratio in the shoots and salt stress tolerance (shoot growth), while knockout of OsHAK5 decreased the K-sodium concentration ratio in the shoots, resulting in sensitivity to salt stress. Taken together, these results demonstrate that OsHAK5 plays a major role in K acquisition by roots faced with low external K and in K upward transport from roots to shoots in K-deficient rice plants.Potassium (K) is one of the three most important macronutrients and the most abundant cation in plants. As a major osmoticum in the vacuole, K drives the generation of turgor pressure, enabling cell expansion. In the vascular tissue, K is an important participant in the generation of root pressure (for review, see Wegner, 2014 [including his new hypothesis]). In the phloem, K is critical for the transport of photoassimilates from source to sink (Marschner, 1996; Deeken et al., 2002; Gajdanowicz et al., 2011). In addition, enhancing K absorption and decreasing sodium (Na) accumulation is a major strategy of glycophytes in salt stress tolerance (Maathuis and Amtmann, 1999; Munns and Tester, 2008; Shabala and Cuin, 2008).Plants acquire K through K-permeable proteins at the root surface. Since available K concentration in the soil may vary by 100-fold, plants have developed multiple K uptake systems for adapting to this variability (Epstein et al., 1963; Grabov, 2007; Maathuis, 2009). In a classic K uptake experiment in barley (Hordeum vulgare), root K absorption has been described as a high-affinity and low-affinity biphasic transport process (Epstein et al., 1963). It is generally assumed that the low-affinity transport system (LATS) in the roots mediates K uptake in the millimolar range and that the activity of this system is insensitive to external K concentration (Maathuis and Sanders, 1997; Chérel et al., 2014). In contrast, the high-affinity transport system (HATS) was rapidly up-regulated when the supply of exogenous K was halted (Glass, 1976; Glass and Dunlop, 1978).The membrane transporters for K flux identified in plants are generally classified into three channels and three transporter families based on phylogenetic analysis (Mäser et al., 2001; Véry and Sentenac, 2003; Lebaudy et al., 2007; Alemán et al., 2011). For K uptake, it was predicted that, under most circumstances, K transporters function as HATS, while K-permeable channels mediate LATS (Maathuis and Sanders, 1997). However, a root-expressed K channel in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), Arabidopsis K Transporter1 (AKT1), mediates K absorption over a wide range of external K concentrations (Sentenac et al., 1992; Lagarde et al., 1996; Hirsch et al., 1998; Spalding et al., 1999), while evidence is accumulating that many K transporters, including members of the K transporter (KT)/high affinity K transporter (HAK)/K uptake permease (KUP) family, are low-affinity K transporters (Quintero and Blatt, 1997; Senn et al., 2001), implying that functions of plant K channels and transporters overlap at different K concentration ranges.Out of the three families of K transporters, cation proton antiporter (CPA), high affinity K/Na transporter (HKT), and KT/HAK/KUP, CPA was characterized as a K⁺(Na⁺)/H⁺ antiporter, HKT may cotransport Na and K or transport Na only (Rubio et al., 1995; Uozumi et al., 2000), while KT/HAK/KUP were predicted to be H⁺-coupled K⁺ symporters (Mäser et al., 2001; Lebaudy et al., 2007). KT/HAK/KUP were named by different researchers who first identified and cloned them (Quintero and Blatt, 1997; Santa-María et al., 1997). In plants, the KT/HAK/KUP family is the largest K transporter family, including 13 members in Arabidopsis and 27 members in the rice (Oryza sativa) genome (Rubio et al., 2000; Mäser et al., 2001; Bañuelos et al., 2002; Gupta et al., 2008). Sequence alignments show that genes of this family share relatively low homology to each other. The KT/HAK/KUP family was divided into four major clusters (Rubio et al., 2000; Gupta et al., 2008), and in cluster I and II, they were further separated into A and B groups. Genes of cluster I or II likely exist in all plants, cluster III is composed of genes from both Arabidopsis and rice, while cluster IV includes only four rice genes (Grabov, 2007; Gupta et al., 2008).The functions of KT/HAK/KUP were studied mostly in heterologous expression systems. Transporters of cluster I, such as AtHAK5, HvHAK1, OsHAK1, and OsHAK5, are localized in the plasma membrane (Kim et al., 1998; Bañuelos et al., 2002; Gierth et al., 2005) and exhibit high-affinity K uptake in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae (Santa-María et al., 1997; Fu and Luan, 1998; Rubio et al., 2000) and in Escherichia coli (Horie et al., 2011). Transporters of cluster II, like AtKUP4 (TINY ROOT HAIRS1, TRH1), HvHAK2, OsHAK2, OsHAK7, and OsHAK10, could not complement the K uptake-deficient yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) but were able to mediate K fluxes in a bacterial mutant; they might be tonoplast transporters (Senn et al., 2001; Bañuelos et al., 2002; Rodríguez-Navarro and Rubio, 2006). The function of transporters in clusters III and IV is even less known (Grabov, 2007).Existing data suggest that some KT/HAK/KUP transporters also may respond to salinity stress (Maathuis, 2009). The cluster I transporters of HvHAK1 mediate Na influx (Santa-María et al., 1997), while AtHAK5 expression is inhibited by Na (Rubio et al., 2000; Nieves-Cordones et al., 2010). Expression of OsHAK5 in tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) BY2 cells enhanced the salt tolerance of these cells by accumulating more K without affecting their Na content (Horie et al., 2011).There are only scarce reports on the physiological function of KT/HAK/KUP in planta. In Arabidopsis, mutation of AtKUP2 (SHORT HYPOCOTYL3) resulted in a short hypocotyl, small leaves, and a short flowering stem (Elumalai et al., 2002), while a loss-of-function mutation of AtKUP4 (TRH1) resulted in short root hairs and a loss of gravity response in the root (Rigas et al., 2001; Desbrosses et al., 2003; Ahn et al., 2004). AtHAK5 is the only system currently known to mediate K uptake at concentrations below 0.01 mm (Rubio et al., 2010) and provides a cesium uptake pathway (Qi et al., 2008). AtHAK5 and AtAKT1 are the two major physiologically relevant molecular entities mediating K uptake into roots in the range between 0.01 and 0.05 mm (Pyo et al., 2010; Rubio et al., 2010). AtAKT1 may contribute to K uptake within the K concentrations that belong to the high-affinity system described by Epstein et al. (1963).Among all 27 members of the KT/HAK/KUP family in rice, OsHAK1, OsHAK5, OsHAK19, and OsHAK20 were grouped in cluster IB (Gupta et al., 2008). These four rice HAK members share 50.9% to 53.4% amino acid identity with AtHAK5. OsHAK1 was expressed in the whole plant, with maximum expression in roots, and was up-regulated by K deficiency; it mediated high-affinity K uptake in yeast (Bañuelos et al., 2002). In this study, we examined the tissue-specific localization and the physiological functions of OsHAK5 in response to variation in K supply and to salt stress in rice. By comparing K uptake and translocation in OsHAK5 knockout (KO) mutants and in OsHAK5-overexpressing lines with those in their respective wild-type lines supplied with different K concentrations, we found that OsHAK5 not only mediates high-affinity K acquisition but also participates in root-to-shoot K transport as well as in K-regulated salt tolerance.     

Disruption of Fumarylacetoacetate Hydrolase Causes Spontaneous Cell Death under Short-Day Conditions in Arabidopsis

Fumarylacetoacetate hydrolase (FAH) hydrolyzes fumarylacetoacetate to fumarate and acetoacetate, the final step in the tyrosine (Tyr) degradation pathway that is essential to animals. Deficiency of FAH in animals results in an inborn lethal disorder. However, the role for the Tyr degradation pathway in plants remains to be elucidated. In this study, we isolated an Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) short-day sensitive cell death1 (sscd1) mutant that displays a spontaneous cell death phenotype under short-day conditions. The SSCD1 gene was cloned via a map-based cloning approach and found to encode an Arabidopsis putative FAH. The spontaneous cell death phenotype of the sscd1 mutant was completely eliminated by further knockout of the gene encoding the putative homogentisate dioxygenase, which catalyzes homogentisate into maleylacetoacetate (the antepenultimate step) in the Tyr degradation pathway. Furthermore, treatment of Arabidopsis wild-type seedlings with succinylacetone, an abnormal metabolite caused by loss of FAH in the Tyr degradation pathway, mimicked the sscd1 cell death phenotype. These results demonstrate that disruption of FAH leads to cell death in Arabidopsis and suggest that the Tyr degradation pathway is essential for plant survival under short-day conditions.Programmed cell death (PCD) has been defined as a sequence of genetically regulated events that lead to the elimination of specific cells, tissues, or whole organs (Lockshin and Zakeri, 2004). In plants, PCD is essential for developmental processes and defense responses (Dangl et al., 1996; Greenberg, 1996; Durrant et al., 2007). One well-characterized example of plant PCD is the hypersensitive response occurring during incompatible plant-pathogen interactions (Lam, 2004), which results in cell death to form visible lesions at the site of infection by an avirulent pathogen and consequently limits the pathogen spread (Morel and Dangl, 1997).To date, a large number of mutants that display spontaneous cell death lesions have been identified in barley (Hordeum vulgare), maize (Zea mays), rice (Oryza sativa), and Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana; Marchetti et al., 1983; Wolter et al., 1993; Dietrich et al., 1994; Gray et al., 1997). Because lesions form in the absence of pathogen infection, these mutants have been collectively termed as lesion-mimic mutants. Many genes with regulatory roles in PCD and defense responses, including LESION SIMULATING DISEASE1, ACCELERATED CELL DEATH11, and VASCULAR ASSOCIATED DEATH1, have been cloned and characterized (Dietrich et al., 1997; Brodersen et al., 2002; Lorrain et al., 2004).The appearance of spontaneous cell death lesions in some lesion-mimic mutants is dependent on photoperiod. For example, the Arabidopsis mutant lesion simulating disease1 and myoinositol-1-phosphate synthase1 show lesions under long days (LD; Dietrich et al., 1994; Meng et al., 2009), whereas the lesion simulating disease2, lesion initiation1, enhancing RPW8-mediated HR-like cell death1, and lag one homolog1 display lesions under short days (SD; Dietrich et al., 1994; Ishikawa et al., 2003; Wang et al., 2008; Ternes et al., 2011).Blockage of some metabolic pathways in plants may cause cell death and result in lesion formation. For example, the lesion-mimic phenotypes in the Arabidopsis mutants lesion initiation2 and accelerated cell death2 and the maize mutant lesion mimic22 result from an impairment of porphyrin metabolism (Hu et al., 1998; Ishikawa et al., 2001; Mach et al., 2001). Deficiency in fatty acid, sphingolipid, and myoinositol metabolism also causes cell death in Arabidopsis (Mou et al., 2000; Liang et al., 2003; Wang et al., 2008; Meng et al., 2009; Donahue et al., 2010; Berkey et al., 2012).Tyr degradation is an essential five-step pathway in animals (Lindblad et al., 1977). First, Tyr aminotransferase catalyzes the conversion of Tyr into 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate, which is further transformed into homogentisate by 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase. Through the sequential action of homogentisate dioxygenase (HGO), maleylacetoacetate isomerase (MAAI), and fumarylacetoacetate hydrolase (FAH), homogentisate is catalyzed to generate fumarate and acetoacetate (Lindblad et al., 1977). Blockage of this pathway in animals results in metabolic disorder diseases (Lindblad et al., 1977; Ruppert et al., 1992; Grompe et al., 1993). For example, human FAH deficiency causes hereditary tyrosinemia type I (HT1), an inborn lethal disease (St-Louis and Tanguay, 1997). Although the homologous genes putatively encoding these enzymes exist in plants (Dixon et al., 2000; Lopukhina et al., 2001; Dixon and Edwards, 2006), it is unclear whether this pathway is essential for plant growth and development.In this study, we report the isolation and characterization of a recessive short-day sensitive cell death1 (sscd1) mutant in Arabidopsis. Map-based cloning of the corresponding gene revealed that SSCD1 encodes the Arabidopsis putative FAH. Further knockout of the gene encoding the Arabidopsis putative HGO completely eliminated the spontaneous cell death phenotype in the sscd1 mutant. Furthermore, we found that treatment of Arabidopsis wild-type seedlings with succinylacetone, an abnormal metabolite caused by loss of FAH in the Tyr degradation pathway (Lindblad et al., 1977), is able to mimic the sscd1 cell death phenotype. These results demonstrate that disruption of FAH leads to cell death in Arabidopsis and suggest that the Tyr degradation pathway is essential for plant survival under SD.     

HAPLESS13, the Arabidopsis μ1 Adaptin,Is Essential for Protein Sorting at the trans-Golgi Network/Early Endosome

In plant cells, secretory and endocytic routes intersect at the trans-Golgi network (TGN)/early endosome (EE), where cargos are further sorted correctly and in a timely manner. Cargo sorting is essential for plant survival and therefore necessitates complex molecular machinery. Adaptor proteins (APs) play key roles in this process by recruiting coat proteins and selecting cargos for different vesicle carriers. The µ1 subunit of AP-1 in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) was recently identified at the TGN/EE and shown to be essential for cytokinesis. However, little was known about other cellular activities affected by mutations in AP-1 or the developmental consequences of such mutations. We report here that HAPLESS13 (HAP13), the Arabidopsis µ1 adaptin, is essential for protein sorting at the TGN/EE. Functional loss of HAP13 displayed pleiotropic developmental defects, some of which were suggestive of disrupted auxin signaling. Consistent with this, the asymmetric localization of PIN-FORMED2 (PIN2), an auxin transporter, was compromised in the mutant. In addition, cell morphogenesis was disrupted. We further demonstrate that HAP13 is critical for brefeldin A-sensitive but wortmannin-insensitive post-Golgi trafficking. Our results show that HAP13 is a key link in the sophisticated trafficking network in plant cells.Plant cells contain sophisticated endomembrane compartments, including the endoplasmic reticulum, the Golgi, the trans-Golgi network (TGN)/early endosome (EE), the prevacuolar compartments/multivesicular bodies (PVC/MVB), various types of vesicles, and the plasma membrane (PM; Ebine and Ueda, 2009; Richter et al., 2009). Intracellular protein sorting between the various locations in the endomembrane system occurs in both secretory and endocytic routes (Richter et al., 2009; De Marcos Lousa et al., 2012). Vesicles in the secretory route start at the endoplasmic reticulum, passing through the Golgi before reaching the TGN/EE, while vesicles in the endocytic route start from the PM before reaching the TGN/EE (Dhonukshe et al., 2007; Viotti et al., 2010). The TGN/EE in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) is an independent and highly dynamic organelle transiently associated with the Golgi (Dettmer et al., 2006; Lam et al., 2007; Viotti et al., 2010), distinct from the animal TGN. Once reaching the TGN/EE, proteins delivered by their vesicle carriers are subject to further sorting, being incorporated either into vesicles that pass through the PVC/MVB before reaching the vacuole for degradation or into vesicles that enter the secretory pathway for delivery to the PM (Ebine and Ueda, 2009; Richter et al., 2009). Therefore, the TGN/EE is a critical sorting compartment that lies at the intersection of the secretory and endocytic routes.Fine-tuned control of intracellular protein sorting at the TGN/EE is essential for plant development (Geldner et al., 2003; Dhonukshe et al., 2007, 2008; Richter et al., 2007; Kitakura et al., 2011; Wang et al., 2013). An auxin gradient is crucial for pattern formation in plants, whose dynamic maintenance requires the polar localization of auxin efflux carrier PINs through endocytic recycling (Geldner et al., 2003; Blilou et al., 2005; Paciorek et al., 2005; Abas et al., 2006; Jaillais et al., 2006; Dhonukshe et al., 2007; Kleine-Vehn et al., 2008). Receptor-like kinases (RLKs) have also been recognized as major cargos undergoing endocytic trafficking, which are either recycled back to the PM or sent for vacuolar degradation (Geldner and Robatzek, 2008; Irani and Russinova, 2009). RLKs are involved in most if not all developmental processes of plants (De Smet et al., 2009).Intracellular protein sorting relies on sorting signals within cargo proteins and on the molecular machinery that recognizes sorting signals (Boehm and Bonifacino, 2001; Robinson, 2004; Dhonukshe et al., 2007). Adaptor proteins (AP) play a key role (Boehm and Bonifacino, 2001; Robinson, 2004) in the recognition of sorting signals. APs are heterotetrameric protein complexes composed of two large subunits (β and γ/α/δ/ε), a small subunit (σ), and a medium subunit (µ) that is crucial for cargo selection (Boehm and Bonifacino, 2001). APs associate with the cytoplasmic side of secretory and endocytic vesicles, recruiting coat proteins and recognizing sorting signals within cargo proteins for their incorporation into vesicle carriers (Boehm and Bonifacino, 2001). Five APs have been identified so far, classified by their components, subcellular localization, and function (Boehm and Bonifacino, 2001; Robinson, 2004; Hirst et al., 2011). Of the five APs, AP-1 associates with the TGN or recycling endosomes (RE) in yeast and mammals (Huang et al., 2001; Robinson, 2004), mediating the sorting of cargo proteins to compartments of the endosomal-lysosomal system or to the basolateral PM of polarized epithelial cells (Gonzalez and Rodriguez-Boulan, 2009). Knockouts of AP-1 components in multicellular organisms resulted in embryonic lethality (Boehm and Bonifacino, 2001; Robinson, 2004).We show here that the recently identified Arabidopsis µ1 adaptin AP1M2 (Park et al., 2013; Teh et al., 2013) is a key component in the cellular machinery mediating intracellular protein sorting at the TGN/EE. AP1M2 was previously named HAPLESS13 (HAP13), whose mutant allele hap13 showed male gametophytic lethality (Johnson et al., 2004). In recent quests for AP-1 in plants, HAP13/AP1M2 was confirmed as the Arabidopsis µ1 adaptin based on its interaction with other components of the AP-1 complex as well as its localization at the TGN (Park et al., 2013; Teh et al., 2013). A novel mutant allele of HAP13/AP1M2, ap1m2-1, was found to be defective in the intracellular distribution of KNOLLE, leading to defective cytokinesis (Park et al., 2013; Teh et al., 2013). However, it was not clear whether HAP13/AP1M2 mediated other cellular activities and their developmental consequences. Using the same mutant allele, we found that functional loss of HAP13 (hap13-1/ap1m2-1) resulted in a full spectrum of growth defects, suggestive of compromised auxin signaling and of defective RLK signaling. Cell morphogenesis was also disturbed in hap13-1. Importantly, hap13-1 was insensitive to brefeldin A (BFA) washout, indicative of defects in guanine nucleotide exchange factors for ADP-ribosylation factor (ArfGEF)-mediated post-Golgi trafficking. Furthermore, HAP13/AP1M2 showed evolutionarily conserved function during vacuolar fusion, providing additional support to its identity as a µ1 adaptin. These results demonstrate the importance of the Arabidopsis µ1 adaptin for intracellular protein sorting centered on the TGN/EE.     

The Rubisco Small Subunit Is Involved in Tobamovirus Movement and Tm-22-Mediated Extreme Resistance

The multifunctional movement protein (MP) of Tomato mosaic tobamovirus (ToMV) is involved in viral cell-to-cell movement, symptom development, and resistance gene recognition. However, it remains to be elucidated how ToMV MP plays such diverse roles in plants. Here, we show that ToMV MP interacts with the Rubisco small subunit (RbCS) of Nicotiana benthamiana in vitro and in vivo. In susceptible N. benthamiana plants, silencing of NbRbCS enabled ToMV to induce necrosis in inoculated leaves, thus enhancing virus local infectivity. However, the development of systemic viral symptoms was delayed. In transgenic N. benthamiana plants harboring Tobacco mosaic virus resistance-2² (Tm-2²), which mediates extreme resistance to ToMV, silencing of NbRbCS compromised Tm-2²-dependent resistance. ToMV was able to establish efficient local infection but was not able to move systemically. These findings suggest that NbRbCS plays a vital role in tobamovirus movement and plant antiviral defenses.Plant viruses use at least one movement protein (MP) to facilitate viral spread between plant cells via plasmodesmata (PD; Lucas and Gilbertson, 1994; Ghoshroy et al., 1997). Among viral MPs, the MP of tobamoviruses, such as Tobacco mosaic virus (TMV) and its close relative Tomato mosaic virus (ToMV), is the best characterized. TMV MP specifically accumulates in PD and modifies the plasmodesmatal size exclusion limit in mature source leaves or tissues (Wolf et al., 1989; Deom et al., 1990; Ding et al., 1992). TMV MP and viral genomic RNA form a mobile ribonucleoprotein complex that is essential for cell-to-cell movement of viral infection (Watanabe et al., 1984; Deom et al., 1987; Citovsky et al., 1990, 1992; Kiselyova et al., 2001; Kawakami et al., 2004; Waigmann et al., 2007). TMV MP also enhances intercellular RNA silencing (Vogler et al., 2008) and affects viral symptom development, host range, and host susceptibility to virus (Dardick et al., 2000; Bazzini et al., 2007). Furthermore, ToMV MP is identified as an avirulence factor that is recognized by tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) resistance proteins Tobacco mosaic virus resistance-2 (Tm-2) and Tm-2² (Meshi et al., 1989; Lanfermeijer et al., 2004). Indeed, tomato Tm-2² confers extreme resistance against TMV and ToMV in tomato plants and even in heterologous tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) plants (Lanfermeijer et al., 2003, 2004).To date, several host factors that interact with TMV MP have been identified. These TMV MP-binding host factors include cell wall-associated proteins such as pectin methylesterase (Chen et al., 2000), calreticulin (Meshi et al., 1989), ANK1 (Ueki et al., 2010), and the cellular DnaJ-like protein MPIP1 (Shimizu et al., 2009). Many cytoskeletal components such as actin filaments (McLean et al., 1995), microtubules (Heinlein et al., 1995), and the microtubule-associated proteins MPB2C (Kragler et al., 2003) and EB1a (Brandner et al., 2008) also interact with TMV MP. Most of these factors are involved in TMV cell-to-cell movement.Rubisco catalyzes the first step of CO₂ assimilation in photosynthesis and photorespiration. The Rubisco holoenzyme is a heteropolymer consisting of eight large subunits (RbCLs) and eight small subunits (RbCSs). RbCL was reported to interact with the coat protein of Potato virus Y (Feki et al., 2005). Both RbCS and RbCL were reported to interact with the P3 proteins encoded by several potyviruses, including Shallot yellow stripe virus, Onion yellow dwarf virus, Soybean mosaic virus, and Turnip mosaic virus (Lin et al., 2011). Proteomic analysis of the plant-virus interactome revealed that RbCS participates in the formation of virus complexes of Rice yellow mottle virus (Brizard et al., 2006). However, the biological function of Rubisco in viral infection remains unknown.In this study, we show that RbCS plays an essential role in virus movement, host susceptibility, and Tm-2²-mediated extreme resistance in the ToMV-host plant interaction.