The Receptor-Like Protein ReMAX of Arabidopsis Detects the Microbe-Associated Molecular Pattern eMax from Xanthomonas

As part of their immune system, plants have pattern recognition receptors (PRRs) that can detect a broad range of microbe-associated molecular patterns (MAMPs). Here, we identified a PRR of Arabidopsis thaliana with specificity for the bacterial MAMP eMax from xanthomonads. Response to eMax seems to be restricted to the Brassicaceae family and also varied among different accessions of Arabidopsis. In crosses between sensitive accessions and the insensitive accession Shakhdara, eMax perception mapped to RECEPTOR-LIKE PROTEIN1 (RLP1). Functional complementation of rlp1 mutants required gene constructs that code for a longer version of RLP1 that we termed ReMAX (for receptor of eMax). ReMAX/RLP1 is a typical RLP with structural similarity to the tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) RLP Eix2, which detects fungal xylanase as a MAMP. Attempts to demonstrate receptor function by interfamily transfer of ReMAX to Nicotiana benthamiana were successful after using hybrid receptors with the C-terminal part of ReMAX replaced by that of Eix2. These results show that ReMAX determines specificity for eMax. They also demonstrate hybrid receptor technology as a promising tool to overcome problems that impede interfamily transfer of PRRs to enhance pathogen detection in crop plants.     

The Arabidopsis Malectin-Like Leucine-Rich Repeat Receptor-Like Kinase IOS1 Associates with the Pattern Recognition Receptors FLS2 and EFR and Is Critical for Priming of Pattern-Triggered Immunity

Plasma membrane-localized pattern recognition receptors such as FLAGELLIN SENSING2 (FLS2) and EF-TU RECEPTOR (EFR) recognize microbe-associated molecular patterns (MAMPs) to activate the first layer of plant immunity termed pattern-triggered immunity (PTI). A reverse genetics approach with genes responsive to the priming agent β-aminobutyric acid (BABA) revealed IMPAIRED OOMYCETE SUSCEPTIBILITY1 (IOS1) as a critical PTI player. Arabidopsis thaliana ios1 mutants were hypersusceptible to Pseudomonas syringae bacteria. Accordingly, ios1 mutants demonstrated defective PTI responses, notably delayed upregulation of PTI marker genes, lower callose deposition, and mitogen-activated protein kinase activities upon bacterial infection or MAMP treatment. Moreover, Arabidopsis lines overexpressing IOS1 were more resistant to P. syringae and demonstrated a primed PTI response. In vitro pull-down, bimolecular fluorescence complementation, coimmunoprecipitation, and mass spectrometry analyses supported the existence of complexes between the membrane-localized IOS1 and FLS2 and EFR. IOS1 also associated with BRASSINOSTEROID INSENSITIVE1-ASSOCIATED KINASE1 (BAK1) in a ligand-independent manner and positively regulated FLS2/BAK1 complex formation upon MAMP treatment. Finally, ios1 mutants were defective in BABA-induced resistance and priming. This work reveals IOS1 as a regulatory protein of FLS2- and EFR-mediated signaling that primes PTI activation upon bacterial elicitation.     

Fungal Endopolygalacturonases Are Recognized as Microbe-Associated Molecular Patterns by the Arabidopsis Receptor-Like Protein RESPONSIVENESS TO BOTRYTIS POLYGALACTURONASES1

Plants perceive microbial invaders using pattern recognition receptors that recognize microbe-associated molecular patterns. In this study, we identified RESPONSIVENESS TO BOTRYTIS POLYGALACTURONASES1 (RBPG1), an Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) leucine-rich repeat receptor-like protein, AtRLP42, that recognizes fungal endopolygalacturonases (PGs) and acts as a novel microbe-associated molecular pattern receptor. RBPG1 recognizes several PGs from the plant pathogen Botrytis cinerea as well as one from the saprotroph Aspergillus niger. Infiltration of B. cinerea PGs into Arabidopsis accession Columbia induced a necrotic response, whereas accession Brno (Br-0) showed no symptoms. A map-based cloning strategy, combined with comparative and functional genomics, led to the identification of the Columbia RBPG1 gene and showed that this gene is essential for the responsiveness of Arabidopsis to the PGs. Transformation of RBPG1 into accession Br-0 resulted in a gain of PG responsiveness. Transgenic Br-0 plants expressing RBPG1 were equally susceptible as the recipient Br-0 to the necrotroph B. cinerea and to the biotroph Hyaloperonospora arabidopsidis. Pretreating leaves of the transgenic plants with a PG resulted in increased resistance to H. arabidopsidis. Coimmunoprecipitation experiments demonstrated that RBPG1 and PG form a complex in Nicotiana benthamiana, which also involves the Arabidopsis leucine-rich repeat receptor-like protein SOBIR1 (for SUPPRESSOR OF BIR1). sobir1 mutant plants did not induce necrosis in response to PGs and were compromised in PG-induced resistance to H. arabidopsidis.Microbe-associated molecular patterns (MAMPs) are molecular signatures of entire groups of microbes and have key roles in activation of the defense response in plants (Jones and Dangl, 2006; Boller and Felix, 2009). Well-characterized proteinaceous MAMPs are bacterial flagellin, Elongation Factor Tu (EF-Tu), and Ax21, fungal xylanase, and oomycete pep13, an epitope of a secreted transglutaminase (Boller and Felix, 2009; Monaghan and Zipfel, 2012). Plants recognize MAMPs by means of pattern recognition receptors (PRRs), comprising a group of leucine-rich repeat (LRR) receptor-like kinases (RLKs) or LRR receptor-like proteins (RLPs) located in the plasma membrane (Greeff et al., 2012; Monaghan and Zipfel, 2012). The LRR-RLKs FLS2 and EFR recognize flg22 (the 22-amino acid eliciting epitope from the conserved flagellin domain) and elf18/elf26 (peptides derived from the N terminus of translation elongation factor EF-Tu), respectively (Gómez-Gómez and Boller, 2000; Kunze et al., 2004; Chinchilla et al., 2006; Zipfel et al., 2006). The fungal protein ethylene-inducing xylanase (EIX) is recognized by the tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) LRR-RLPs LeEIX1 and LeEIX2, of which only the latter mediates a necrotic response (Ron and Avni, 2004).BRI1-ASSOCIATED KINASE1/SOMATIC EMBRYOGENESIS RECEPTOR KINASE3 (BAK1/SERK3) is an LRR-RLK acting as a common component in many RLK signaling complexes (Monaghan and Zipfel, 2012). Although it was originally identified as a protein that interacts with the brassinosteroid receptor BRI1 (Li et al., 2002; Nam and Li, 2002), BAK1 also forms ligand-induced complexes with FLS2 and EFR and contributes to disease resistance against the pathogens Pseudomonas syringae, Hyaloperonospora arabidopsidis (Hpa), and Phytophthora infestans (Chinchilla et al., 2007; Heese et al., 2007; Chaparro-Garcia et al., 2011; Roux et al., 2011). Tomato BAK1 interacts in a ligand-independent manner with LeEIX1 but not with LeEIX2, and the BAK1-LeEIX1 interaction is required for the ability of LeEIX1 to attenuate the signaling of LeEIX2 (Bar et al., 2010). BAK1 has also been shown to interact with another LRR-RLK, BAK1-INTERACTING RECEPTOR-LIKE KINASE1 (BIR1). A bir1 mutant showed extensive cell death, activation of constitutive defense responses, and impairment in the activation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase MPK4 (Gao et al., 2009). sobir1 (for suppressor of BIR1) mutants suppress BIR1 phenotypes, and overexpression of SOBIR1 triggers cell death and defense responses (Gao et al., 2009). SOBIR1 does not physically interact with BIR1, suggesting that SOBIR1 mediates an alternative signal transduction route. A recent study showed that the tomato SOBIR1 interacts with RLPs and is required for RLP-mediated disease resistance (Liebrand et al., 2013).Endopolygalacturonases (PGs) are a class of pectinases that hydrolyze the homogalacturonan domain of pectic polysaccharides (van den Brink and de Vries, 2011). Secreted PGs are able to cause cell wall decomposition and tissue maceration and thereby act as virulence factors in several fungal pathogens, such as Aspergillus flavus, Claviceps purpurea, and Alternaria citri (Shieh et al., 1997; Isshiki et al., 2001; Oeser et al., 2002). The most extensively studied PGs from fungal plant pathogens are those of Botrytis cinerea (for review, see Zhang and van Kan, 2013b), a necrotrophic broad-host-range pathogen that contains six PG genes (designated Bcpg1–Bcpg6) in its genome (Wubben et al., 1999). Deletion of either Bcpg1 or Bcpg2 resulted in a strong reduction in virulence on tomato and broad bean (Vicia faba) leaves (ten Have et al., 1998; Kars et al., 2005), presumably because the enzymes have a detrimental effect on the integrity of host cell walls and tissues. Indeed, infiltrating BcPG2 into broad bean leaves or transient expression of BcPG2 in Nicotiana benthamiana led to tissue collapse and necrosis, and the necrotic response was abolished when the catalytic domain of the PG was mutated (Kars et al., 2005; Joubert et al., 2007). By contrast, Poinssot et al. (2003) reported that BcPG1 can activate plant defense responses in grapevine (Vitis vinifera) cell suspensions independently of its enzymatic activity, suggesting that the protein itself might be recognized by plant cells as an elicitor. These studies with seemingly opposing conclusions were conducted with different isozymes on distinct cell types of different plant species. Thus, it remained inconclusive whether plant responses observed after exposure to PGs are due to the structural damage resulting from pectin hydrolysis or to recognition of the protein as a MAMP (followed by downstream signaling responses).The degradation of pectin by PGs leads to the release of oligogalacturonides (OGAs), which may activate a variety of defense responses (Prade et al., 1999; D’Ovidio et al., 2004). OGAs act as damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs) via their perception by the cell wall-associated receptor Wall-Associated Kinase1 (WAK1; Brutus et al., 2010). Overexpression of WAK1 in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) enhances resistance to B. cinerea (Brutus et al., 2010).Here, we describe the occurrence of natural variation among Arabidopsis accessions in responsiveness to fungal PGs. Two accessions that strongly differed in their response to PGs were selected for further analysis. Cloning and functional characterization demonstrated that the gene RESPONSIVENESS TO BOTRYTIS POLYGALACTURONASES1 (RBPG1) encodes an LRR-RLP. Finally, we demonstrate that the LRR-RLK SUPPRESSOR OF BIR1 (SOBIR1) interacts with RBPG1 and is essential for responsiveness to fungal PGs.     

An Overdose of the Arabidopsis Coreceptor BRASSINOSTEROID INSENSITIVE1-ASSOCIATED RECEPTOR KINASE1 or Its Ectodomain Causes Autoimmunity in a SUPPRESSOR OF BIR1-1-Dependent Manner

The membrane-bound BRASSINOSTEROID INSENSITIVE1-ASSOCIATED RECEPTOR KINASE1 (BAK1) is a common coreceptor in plants and regulates distinct cellular programs ranging from growth and development to defense against pathogens. BAK1 functions through binding to ligand-stimulated transmembrane receptors and activating their kinase domains via transphosphorylation. In the absence of microbes, BAK1 activity may be suppressed by different mechanisms, like interaction with the regulatory BIR (for BAK1-INTERACTING RECEPTOR-LIKE KINASE) proteins. Here, we demonstrated that BAK1 overexpression in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) could cause detrimental effects on plant development, including growth arrest, leaf necrosis, and reduced seed production. Further analysis using an inducible expression system showed that BAK1 accumulation quickly stimulated immune responses, even under axenic conditions, and led to increased resistance to pathogenic Pseudomonas syringae pv tomato DC3000. Intriguingly, our study also revealed that the plasma membrane-associated BAK1 ectodomain was sufficient to induce autoimmunity, indicating a novel mode of action for BAK1 in immunity control. We postulate that an excess of BAK1 or its ectodomain could trigger immune receptor activation in the absence of microbes through unbalancing regulatory interactions, including those with BIRs. Consistently, mutation of SUPPRESSOR OF BIR1-1, which encodes an emerging positive regulator of transmembrane receptors in plants, suppressed the effects of BAK1 overexpression. In conclusion, our findings unravel a new role for the BAK1 ectodomain in the tight regulation of Arabidopsis immune receptors necessary to avoid inappropriate activation of immunity.Plants rely on their innate immune system to detect microbes and mount an active defense against pathogens. The plant immune system is traditionally considered to be composed of two layers (Jones and Dangl, 2006). The first one is based on the activity of pattern-recognition receptors (PRRs) that can detect microbe-associated molecular patterns (MAMPs) and trigger what is termed pattern-triggered immunity (PTI; Boller and Felix, 2009). Many plant pathogens can suppress this basal defense response using virulence factors termed effectors. In a second layer of defense, plants can make use of resistance (R) proteins to recognize the presence of pathogen effectors resulting in effector-triggered immunity (ETI), which resembles an accelerated and amplified PTI response (Jones and Dangl, 2006).Plants utilize plasma membrane-associated receptor-like proteins (RLPs) or receptor-like kinases (RLKs) as PRRs to sense specific signals through their ectodomains (Böhm et al., 2014). RLPs and RLKs require the function of additional RLKs to form active receptor complexes and transfer the external signal to the inside of the cells (Zhang and Thomma, 2013; Cao et al., 2014; Liebrand et al., 2014). The best-known coreceptor is the leucine-rich repeat (LRR)-RLK BRASSINOSTEROID INSENSITIVE1-ASSOCIATED RECEPTOR KINASE1 (BAK1), which was originally identified as a positive regulator and partner for the brassinosteroid (BR) receptor BRASSINOSTEROID INSENSITIVE1 (BRI1; Li et al., 2002; Nam and Li, 2002). BRs refer to phytohormones that promote plant growth and development (Fujioka and Yokota, 2003). Thus, loss-of-function mutations in BAK1 negatively impact Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) growth due to improper cell elongation. In short, bak1 mutants display compact rosettes with round-shaped leaves and shorter petioles and phenocopy weak bri1 mutations (Li et al., 2002; Nam and Li, 2002). Conversely, certain mutants affected in the BAK1 ectodomain show increased activity in the BR signaling pathway and share phenotypic similarities with BRI1-overexpressing lines (Wang et al., 2001), including elongated hypocotyls, petioles, and leaf blades and an overall increase in height (Jaillais et al., 2011; Chung et al., 2012).Furthermore, BAK1 is involved in the containment of cell death, independently of its function in BR signaling. Arabidopsis bak1 knockout mutants exhibit extensive cell death spreading after microbial infection (Kemmerling et al., 2007). In addition, spontaneous cell death develops in Arabidopsis double mutant plants lacking both BAK1 (also named SOMATIC EMBRYOGENESIS RECEPTOR KINASE3 [SERK3]) and its closest homolog BAK1-LIKE1 (BKK1)/SERK4, causing seedling lethality even in the absence of microbes (He et al., 2007). Similar phenotypes are observed in Arabidopsis, rice (Oryza sativa), and Nicotiana benthamiana by lowering the expression of BAK1 and its homologs (Heese et al., 2007; Jeong et al., 2010; Park et al., 2011). Interestingly, typical defense responses, like the production of reactive oxygen species and constitutive callose deposition, are also detected in those plants, although the basis for this phenomenon remains poorly understood (He et al., 2007; Kemmerling et al., 2007; Park et al., 2011; Gao et al., 2013).On the other hand, BAK1 is widely studied as a key component of immune signaling pathways due to its known association with different PRRs, including RLKs and RLPs (Kim et al., 2013; Böhm et al., 2014). Upon MAMP perception, PRRs induce signaling and physiological defense responses like mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) activation, reactive oxygen species and ethylene production, and modifications in gene expression, all of which contribute to PTI. Among the best-studied examples of BAK1-regulated PRRs are two LRR-receptor kinases, ELONGATION FACTOR Tu RECEPTOR (EFR), which senses the active epitope elf18 of the bacterial elongation factor Tu, and the flagellin receptor FLAGELLIN SENSING2 (FLS2), which senses the active epitope flg22 of bacterial flagellin (Gómez-Gómez and Boller, 2000; Chinchilla et al., 2006; Zipfel et al., 2006). Immediately after flg22 binding to its LRR ectodomain, FLS2 forms a tight complex with BAK1 (Chinchilla et al., 2007; Sun et al., 2013). This heteromerization step may bring the two kinase domains closer and thereby induce, within seconds, the phosphorylation of BAK1 and FLS2 (Schulze et al., 2010; Schwessinger et al., 2011). These steps are sufficient to initiate the immune signaling pathway, even if the ectodomains and kinase domains are switched between FLS2 and BAK1 (Albert et al., 2013).While PRRs, such as FLS2 and EFR, are extremely sensitive to even subnanomolar concentrations of their ligands, a tight control of these receptors is expected, since constitutive activation of defense responses in plants dramatically impairs fitness and growth (Tian et al., 2003; Korves and Bergelson, 2004). However, the mechanisms that underlie the attenuation of PRR activation or prevent these receptors from signaling constitutively remain largely unknown (Macho and Zipfel, 2014). Several independent observations indicate that BAK1 and FLS2 are present in close spatial proximity in preformed complexes at the plasma membrane (Chinchilla et al., 2007; Schulze et al., 2010; Roux et al., 2011). Negative regulation of immune signaling prior to ligand perception could happen within the PRR complex and depend on conformational changes following the association of FLS2 with flg22 (Meindl et al., 2000; Schulze et al., 2010; Mueller et al., 2012). Additionally, other partners might prevent the constitutive interaction of BAK1 with FLS2. Such could be the case for the LRR-RLK BAK1-INTERACTING RECEPTOR-LIKE KINASEs (BIRs): BIR2 was recently discovered as a substrate and negative regulator for BAK1, while the absence of BIR1 leads to the activation of defense induction and strong dwarfism (Gao et al., 2009; Halter et al., 2014b). Furthermore, MAMP signaling may be constrained by phosphatases, as suggested in earlier studies (Felix et al., 1994; Gómez-Gómez et al., 2001) and recently shown for the protein phosphatase 2A, which controls PRR activation likely by modulating the BAK1 phosphostatus (Segonzac et al., 2014). These examples illustrate the variety of mechanisms that may tightly control BAK1 activity.In this work, we show that regulation of BAK1 accumulation is crucial for Arabidopsis fitness, as its overexpression leads to dwarfism and premature death. The phenotype differs from BR mutants and is very reminiscent of or even identical to the autoimmune phenotype of plants showing constitutive activation of R proteins (Oldroyd and Staskawicz, 1998; Bendahmane et al., 2002; Zhang et al., 2003). BAK1 overexpression is associated with constitutive activation of defense pathway(s) involving the general coregulator of RLPs, SUPPRESSOR OF BIR1-1 (SOBIR1; Liebrand et al., 2013, 2014). To our knowledge, this is the first report and comprehensive characterization of such an autoimmunity phenotype for Arabidopsis plants overexpressing BAK1, and it highlights the importance of the regulation of PTI overactivation.     

ACTIN DEPOLYMERIZING FACTOR4 Regulates Actin Dynamics during Innate Immune Signaling in Arabidopsis

Conserved microbe-associated molecular patterns (MAMPs) are sensed by pattern recognition receptors (PRRs) on cells of plants and animals. MAMP perception typically triggers rearrangements to actin cytoskeletal arrays during innate immune signaling. However, the signaling cascades linking PRR activation by MAMPs to cytoskeleton remodeling are not well characterized. Here, we developed a system to dissect, at high spatial and temporal resolution, the regulation of actin dynamics during innate immune signaling in plant cells. Within minutes of MAMP perception, we detected changes to single actin filament turnover in epidermal cells treated with bacterial and fungal MAMPs. These MAMP-induced alterations phenocopied an ACTIN DEPOLYMERIZING FACTOR4 (ADF4) knockout mutant. Moreover, actin arrays in the adf4 mutant were unresponsive to a bacterial MAMP, elf26, but responded normally to the fungal MAMP, chitin. Together, our data provide strong genetic and cytological evidence for the inhibition of ADF activity regulating actin remodeling during innate immune signaling. This work is the first to directly link an ADF/cofilin to the cytoskeletal rearrangements elicited directly after pathogen perception in plant or mammalian cells.     

The Leucine-Rich Repeat Receptor-Like Kinase BRASSINOSTEROID INSENSITIVE1-ASSOCIATED KINASE1 and the Cytochrome P450 PHYTOALEXIN DEFICIENT3 Contribute to Innate Immunity to Aphids in Arabidopsis

The importance of pathogen-associated molecular pattern-triggered immunity (PTI) against microbial pathogens has been recently demonstrated. However, it is currently unclear if this layer of immunity mediated by surface-localized pattern recognition receptors (PRRs) also plays a role in basal resistance to insects, such as aphids. Here, we show that PTI is an important component of plant innate immunity to insects. Extract of the green peach aphid (GPA; Myzus persicae) triggers responses characteristic of PTI in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana). Two separate eliciting GPA-derived fractions trigger induced resistance to GPA that is dependent on the leucine-rich repeat receptor-like kinase BRASSINOSTEROID INSENSITIVE1-ASSOCIATED KINASE1 (BAK1)/SOMATIC-EMBRYOGENESIS RECEPTOR-LIKE KINASE3, which is a key regulator of several leucine-rich repeat-containing PRRs. BAK1 is required for GPA elicitor-mediated induction of reactive oxygen species and callose deposition. Arabidopsis bak1 mutant plants are also compromised in immunity to the pea aphid (Acyrthosiphon pisum), for which Arabidopsis is normally a nonhost. Aphid-derived elicitors induce expression of PHYTOALEXIN DEFICIENT3 (PAD3), a key cytochrome P450 involved in the biosynthesis of camalexin, which is a major Arabidopsis phytoalexin that is toxic to GPA. PAD3 is also required for induced resistance to GPA, independently of BAK1 and reactive oxygen species production. Our results reveal that plant innate immunity to insects may involve early perception of elicitors by cell surface-localized PRRs, leading to subsequent downstream immune signaling.Close to a million insect species have so far been described, and nearly one-half of them feed on plants (Wu and Baldwin, 2010). Within these plant-feeding insects, most feed on a few related plant species, with only 10% feeding upon multiple plant families (Schoonhoven et al., 2005). Plant defense to insects include several layers (Bos and Hogenhout, 2011; Hogenhout and Bos, 2011). Physical barriers, volatile cues, and composition of secondary metabolites of plants are important components that determine insect host choice (Howe and Jander, 2008; Bruce and Pickett, 2011). In addition, plants induce a variety of plant defense responses upon perception of herbivore oral secretions (OS), saliva, and eggs (De Vos and Jander, 2009; Bruessow et al., 2010; Ma et al., 2010; Wu and Baldwin, 2010). These responses may provide full protection against the majority of insect herbivores, and insects that are able to colonize specific plant species likely produce effectors in their saliva or during egg laying that suppress these induced defense responses (Bos and Hogenhout, 2011; Hogenhout and Bos, 2011; Pitino and Hogenhout, 2013).Aphids are sap-feeding insects of the order Hemiptera and are among the most destructive pests in agriculture, particularly in temperate regions (Blackman and Eastop, 2000). More than 4,000 aphid species in 10 families are known (Dixon, 1998). Most aphid species are specialists and use one or a few closely related plant species within one family as host for feeding and reproduction. Examples are pea aphid (Acyrthosiphon pisum), cabbage aphid (Brevicoryne brassicae), and English grain aphid (Sitobion avenae) that colonize plant species within the legumes (family Fabaceae), brassicas (Brassicaceae), and grasses (Gramineae), respectively. The green peach aphid (GPA; Myzus persicae) is one of few aphid species with a broad host range and can colonize hundreds of plants species in over 40 plant families, including brassicas (Blackman and Eastop, 2000). Aphids possess mouthparts composed of stylets that navigate to the plant vascular system, predominantly the phloem, for long-term feeding. However, before establishing a long-term feeding site, these insects display a host selection behavior by probing the upper leaf cell layers with their stylets, a behavior seen on host and nonhost plants of the aphid (Nam and Hardie, 2012). When the plant is judged unsuitable, the aphid takes off to find an alternative plant host. It is not yet clear what happens in the initial stages of insect interactions with plants.Plants sense microbial organisms (including bacteria, fungi, and oomycetes) through perception of conserved molecules, named microbe-associated molecular patterns and pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) via pattern recognition receptors (PRRs) to induce the first stage of plant immunity, termed PAMP-triggered immunity (PTI). PTI is effective against the majority of plant pathogens. Bacterial and fungal PAMPs characterized so far include bacterial flagellin (or its derived peptide flg22), bacterial elongation factor (EF)-Tu (or its derived peptide elf18), bacterial lipopolysaccharides and bacterial cold shock protein, chitin oligosaccharides, and the oomycete elicitin INF1 (Boller and Felix, 2009)Plant PRRs are either receptor-like kinases (RLKs) or receptor-like proteins. Most leucine-rich repeat (LRR)-type PRRs associate with and rely for their function on the small regulatory LRR-RLK BRASSINOSTEROID INSENSITIVE1-ASSOCIATED KINASE1 (BAK1)/SOMATIC-EMBRYOGENESIS RECEPTOR-LIKE KINASE3 (SERK3; Monaghan and Zipfel, 2012). For example, in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), flg22 and elf18 bind to the LRR-RLKs FLAGELLIN SENSITIVE2 (FLS2) and EF-TU RECEPTOR (EFR), respectively, leading to a quasi-instant association with BAK1 (Gómez-Gómez and Boller, 2000; Zipfel et al., 2006; Chinchilla et al., 2007; Heese et al., 2007; Schulze et al., 2010; Roux et al., 2011; Sun et al., 2013). BAK1 is required for optimal downstream immune signaling events, such as mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) activation, reactive oxygen species (ROS) bursts, callose depositions, induction of immune genes, and induced resistance. Similarly, BAK1 is a positive regulator of innate immune responses triggered by the Arabidopsis LRR-RLKs PLANT ELICITOR PEPTIDE1 RECEPTOR1 (PEPR1) and PEPR2 that bind the Arabidopsis-derived damage-associated molecular pattern A. thaliana Peptide1 (AtPep1; Krol et al., 2010; Postel et al., 2010; Roux et al., 2011) and by the tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) LRR receptor-like protein Ve1 that recognizes Ave1 derived from Verticillium spp. (Fradin et al., 2009; de Jonge et al., 2012). Consistent with the role of BAK1 downstream of numerous PRRs, BAK1 is required for full immunity to a number of bacterial, fungal, oomycete, and viral pathogens (Heese et al., 2007; Kemmerling et al., 2007; Fradin et al., 2009; Chaparro-Garcia et al., 2011; Roux et al., 2011; Kørner et al., 2013).Notably, it has been recently shown that the ortholog of BAK1 in Nicotiana attenuata regulates the induction of jasmonic acid (JA) accumulation upon herbivory (Yang et al., 2011a). However, immunity to insects was not affected when BAK1 was silenced, and the observed effect on JA accumulation may be due to an indirect effect on brassinosteroid (BR) responses, for which BAK1 is also an important positive regulator (Li et al., 2002; Nam and Li, 2002). Therefore, it is currently unclear if BAK1 is involved in the early recognition of insect-derived elicitors leading to immunity.We discovered that the key regulatory LRR-RLK BAK1 participates in plant defense to an insect herbivore. We found that extracts of GPA trigger plant defense responses in Arabidopsis that are characteristic of PTI. Arabidopsis bak1 mutant plants are compromised in defense to GPA, which colonizes Arabidopsis, and to pea aphid, for which Arabidopsis is a nonhost. BAK1 is required for ROS bursts, callose deposition, and induced resistance in Arabidopsis upon perception of aphid-derived elicitors. One of the defense genes induced by GPA-derived extracts encodes PHYTOALEXIN DEFICIENT3 (PAD3), a cytochrome P450 that catalyzes the conversion of dihydrocamalexic acid to camalexin, which is a major Arabidopsis phytoalexin that is toxic to GPA (Kettles et al., 2013). PAD3 expression is required for Arabidopsis-induced resistance to GPA, independently of BAK1 and ROS. Our results provide evidence that innate immunity to insect herbivores may rely on the early perception of elicitors by cell surface-localized PRR.     

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.     

Rhamnolipids Elicit Defense Responses and Induce Disease Resistance against Biotrophic, Hemibiotrophic, and Necrotrophic Pathogens That Require Different Signaling Pathways in Arabidopsis and Highlight a Central Role for Salicylic Acid

Plant resistance to phytopathogenic microorganisms mainly relies on the activation of an innate immune response usually launched after recognition by the plant cells of microbe-associated molecular patterns. The plant hormones, salicylic acid (SA), jasmonic acid, and ethylene have emerged as key players in the signaling networks involved in plant immunity. Rhamnolipids (RLs) are glycolipids produced by bacteria and are involved in surface motility and biofilm development. Here we report that RLs trigger an immune response in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) characterized by signaling molecules accumulation and defense gene activation. This immune response participates to resistance against the hemibiotrophic bacterium Pseudomonas syringae pv tomato, the biotrophic oomycete Hyaloperonospora arabidopsidis, and the necrotrophic fungus Botrytis cinerea. We show that RL-mediated resistance involves different signaling pathways that depend on the type of pathogen. Ethylene is involved in RL-induced resistance to H. arabidopsidis and to P. syringae pv tomato whereas jasmonic acid is essential for the resistance to B. cinerea. SA participates to the restriction of all pathogens. We also show evidence that SA-dependent plant defenses are potentiated by RLs following challenge by B. cinerea or P. syringae pv tomato. These results highlight a central role for SA in RL-mediated resistance. In addition to the activation of plant defense responses, antimicrobial properties of RLs are thought to participate in the protection against the fungus and the oomycete. Our data highlight the intricate mechanisms involved in plant protection triggered by a new type of molecule that can be perceived by plant cells and that can also act directly onto pathogens.In their environment, plants are challenged by potentially pathogenic microorganisms. In response, they express a set of defense mechanisms including preformed structural and chemical barriers, as well as an innate immune response quickly activated after microorganism perception (Boller and Felix, 2009). Plant innate immunity is triggered after recognition by pattern recognition receptors of conserved pathogen- or microbe-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs or MAMPs, respectively) or by plant endogenous molecules released by pathogen invasion and called danger-associated molecular patterns (Boller and Felix, 2009; Dodds and Rathjen, 2010). This first step of recognition leads to the activation of MAMP-triggered immunity (MTI). Successful pathogens can secrete effectors that interfere or suppress MTI, resulting in effector-triggered susceptibility. A second level of perception involves the direct or indirect recognition by specific receptors of pathogen effectors leading to effector-triggered immunity (ETI; Boller and Felix, 2009; Dodds and Rathjen, 2010). Whereas MTI and ETI are thought to involve common signaling network, ETI is usually quantitatively stronger than MTI and associated with more sustained and robust immune responses (Katagiri and Tsuda, 2010; Tsuda and Katagiri, 2010).The plant hormones, salicylic acid (SA), jasmonic acid (JA), and ethylene (ET) have emerged as key players in the signaling networks involved in MTI and ETI (Robert-Seilaniantz et al., 2007; Tsuda et al., 2009; Katagiri and Tsuda, 2010; Mersmann et al., 2010; Tsuda and Katagiri, 2010; Robert-Seilaniantz et al., 2011). Interactions between these signal molecules allow the plant to activate and/or modulate an appropriate spectrum of responses, depending on the pathogen lifestyle, necrotroph or biotroph (Glazebrook, 2005; Koornneef and Pieterse, 2008). It is assumed that JA and ET signaling pathways are important for resistance to necrotrophic fungi including Botrytis cinerea and Alternaria brassicicola (Thomma et al., 2001; Ferrari et al., 2003; Glazebrook, 2005). Infection of Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) with B. cinerea causes the induction of the JA/ET responsive gene PLANT DEFENSIN1.2 (PDF1.2; Penninckx et al., 1996; Zimmerli et al., 2001). Induction of PDF1.2 by B. cinerea is blocked in ethylene-insensitive2 (ein2) and coronatine-insensitive1 (coi1) mutants that are respectively defective in ET and JA signal transduction pathways. Moreover, ein2 and coi1 plants are highly susceptible to B. cinerea infection (Thomma et al., 1998; Thomma et al., 1999). JA/ET-dependent responses do not seem to be usually induced during resistance to biotrophs, but they can be effective if they are stimulated prior to pathogen challenge (Glazebrook, 2005). Plants impaired in SA signaling are highly susceptible to biotrophic and hemibiotrophic pathogens. Following pathogen infection, SA hydroxylase (NahG), enhanced disease susceptibility5 (eds5), or SA induction-deficient2 (sid2) plants are unable to accumulate high SA levels and they display heightened susceptibility to Pseudomonas syringae pv tomato (Pst), Hyaloperonospora arabidopsidis, or Erysiphe orontii (Delaney et al., 1994; Lawton et al., 1995; Wildermuth et al., 2001; Nawrath et al., 2002; Vlot et al., 2009). Mutants that are insensitive to SA, such as nonexpressor of PATHOGENESIS-RELATED (PR) genes1 (npr1), have enhanced susceptibility to these pathogens (Cao et al., 1994; Glazebrook et al., 1996; Shah et al., 1997; Dong, 2004). According to some reports, plant defense against necrotrophs also involves SA. Arabidopsis plants expressing the nahG gene and infected with B. cinerea show larger lesions compared with wild-type plants (Govrin and Levine, 2002). In tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum), acidic isoforms of PR3 and PR5 gene that are specifically induced by SA (Ménard et al., 2004) are up-regulated after challenge by B. cinerea (El Oirdi et al., 2010). Resistance to some necrotrophs like Fusarium graminearum involves both SA and JA signaling pathways (Makandar et al., 2010). It is assumed that SA and JA signaling can be antagonistic (Bostock, 2005; Koornneef and Pieterse, 2008; Pieterse et al., 2009; Thaler et al., 2012). In Arabidopsis, SA inhibits JA-dependent resistance against A. brassicicola or B. cinerea (Spoel et al., 2007; Koornneef et al., 2008). Recent studies demonstrated that ET modulates the NPR1-mediated antagonism between SA and JA (Leon-Reyes et al., 2009; Leon-Reyes et al., 2010a) and suppression by SA of JA-responsive gene expression is targeted at a position downstream of the JA biosynthesis pathway (Leon-Reyes et al., 2010b). Synergistic effects of SA- and JA-dependent signaling are also well documented (Schenk et al., 2000; van Wees et al., 2000; Mur et al., 2006) and induction of some defense responses after pathogen challenge requires intact JA, ET, and SA signaling pathways (Campbell et al., 2003).Isolated MAMPs trigger defense responses that also require the activation of SA, JA, and ET signaling pathways (Tsuda et al., 2009; Katagiri and Tsuda, 2010). For instance, treatment with the flagellin peptide flg22 induces many SA-related genes including SID2, EDS5, NPR1, and PR1 (Ferrari et al., 2007; Denoux et al., 2008), causes SA accumulation (Tsuda et al., 2008; Wang et al., 2009), and activates ET signaling (Bethke et al., 2009; Mersmann et al., 2010). Local application of lipopolysaccharides elevates the level of SA (Mishina and Zeier, 2007). The oomycete Pep13 peptide induces defense responses in potato (Solanum tuberosum) that require both SA and JA (Halim et al., 2009). Although signaling networks induced by isolated MAMPs are well documented, the contribution of SA, JA, and ET in MAMP- or PAMP-induced resistance to biotrophs and necrotrophs is poorly understood.Rhamnolipids (RLs) are glycolipids produced by various bacteria species including some Pseudomonas and Burkholderia species. They are essential for bacterial surface motility and biofilm development (Vatsa et al., 2010; Chrzanowski et al., 2012). RLs are potent stimulators of animal immunity (Vatsa et al., 2010). They have recently been shown to elicit plant defense responses and to induce resistance against B. cinerea in grapevine (Vitis vinifera; Varnier et al., 2009). They also participate to biocontrol activity of the plant beneficial bacteria Pseudomonas aeruginosa PNA1 against oomycetes (Perneel et al., 2008). However, the signaling pathways used by RLs to stimulate plant innate immunity are not known. To gain more insights into RL-induced MTI, we investigated RL-triggered defense responses and resistance to the necrotrophic fungus B. cinerea, the biotroph oomycete H. arabidopsidis, and the hemibiotroph bacterium Pst in Arabidopsis. Our results show that RLs trigger an innate immune response in Arabidopsis that protects the plant against these different lifestyle pathogens. We demonstrate that RL-mediated resistance involves separated signaling sectors that depend on the type of pathogen. In plants challenged by RLs, SA has a central role and participates to the restriction of the three pathogens. ET is fully involved in RL-induced resistance to the biotrophic oomycete and to the hemibiotrophic bacterium whereas JA is essential for the resistance to the necrotrophic fungus.