植物与病原微生物互作分子基础的研究进展

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

植物抗病基因(R)与病原物无毒基因(Avr)相互作用机制的研究进展

PTI和ETI是植物在长期进化过程中形成的两类抵抗病原物的机制。基因对基因假说的抗病方式属于ETI抗性机制的一种,该假说认为具有保守NB-LRR结构域的R蛋白识别病原物非保守的无毒蛋白效应子(Avr),激活防卫反应信号途径,导致过敏性坏死。植物抗病基因(R)与病原菌无毒基因(Avr)产物间的直接或间接相互作用而产生的基因对基因抗性是植物抗病性的重要形式,该文对植物抗病蛋白与无毒蛋白相互作用机制进行了综述。其中,间接相互作用模式是主要方式。     

植物病原茵产生的降解酶及其作用

综述了植物病原微生物产生的降解酶的种类、作用方式、在致病中的地位及研究进展,阐明了细胞壁降解酶的双重作用即作为病原物侵染的致病因子及作为植物防卫反应的激发子,为寄主一病原物分子互作提供一定的参考.     

水稻免疫机制研究进展

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

植物病原菌产生的降解酶及其作用*

综述了植物病原微生物产生的降解酶的种类、作用方式、在致病中的地位及研究进展,阐明了细胞壁降解酶的双重作用:即作为病原物侵染的致病因子及作为植物防卫反应的激发子,为寄主一病原物分子互作提供一定的参考。     

植物病原菌产生的降解酶及其作用

综述了植物病原微生物产生的降解酶的种类、作用方式、在致病中的地位及研究进展,阐明了细胞壁降解酶的双重作用：即作为病原物侵染的致病因子及作为植物防卫反应的激发子,为寄主一病原物分子互作提供一定的参考。     

植物NLR免疫受体的识别、免疫激活与信号调控

高等植物进化出大量膜表面和胞内免疫受体以感知各种病原信号, 抵御病原物入侵。其中, 细胞表面的模式识别受体感知模式分子后激活基础免疫反应, 核苷酸结合和富亮氨酸重复蛋白(NLRs)则通过感知病原微生物分泌的效应蛋白激活特异免疫反应, 导致超敏反应与细胞死亡。该文主要综述了NLRs对效应蛋白的识别、植物免疫激活及下游信号调控的最新研究进展。     

RXLR效应分子抑制植物免疫机制研究进展

植物病原卵菌是一类农业生产上为害巨大的病原物,其分泌大量的RXLR效应分子进入寄主植物细胞并干扰植物免疫系统,以协助病原菌成功侵染。尽管有一小部分RXLR效应分子会被植物识别成为无毒蛋白,但大部分RXLR效应分子则会逃避识别和抑制植物免疫。随着高通量测序和蛋白互作技术的广泛应用,大量RXLR效应分子干扰植物免疫的分子机制已经被揭示。本文综述了RXLR效应分子操纵植物免疫系统的分子策略,探讨了RXLR效应分子与植物免疫互作的研究方向和应用前景。     

基于模式识别受体和人工设计诱饵蛋白扩展植物识别特异性

病原/微生物相关分子模式(PAMPs/MAMPs)被位于宿主细胞表面的模式识别受体(PRRs)识别并激活免疫反应.这种病原相关分子模式触发的免疫反应(PTI)能够帮助植物抵抗大部分致病微生物的侵入,因此利用基因工程技术在植物中表达PRRs,以增强植物对病原微生物的免疫识别是一种非常有潜力的植物抗病性改良的策略.植物病原微生物分泌的效应蛋白通常利用多种多样的生化机制直接靶向和抑制PTI信号通路的关键组分,从而抑制PTI.一些植物进化出与效应蛋白的靶标类似的诱饵蛋白,并诱导效应蛋白的错误靶向.这种识别的结果不抑制PTI免疫反应,反而诱导效应蛋白激活的免疫反应(ETI).这种机制提示了人工设计的诱饵蛋白在特定植物中产生新的识别特异性的可能性.本综述总结了PRRs对PAMPs的识别,以及诱饵蛋白对效应蛋白监控方面的研究进展.利用转基因异源表达EFR或PBS1诱饵蛋白在实验室条件下成功扩展了植物的识别特异性,体现了对PRRs和人工设计的诱饵蛋白在植物对病原识别特异性的扩展和抗病性改良方面的潜力,突显了分离和鉴定新的PRRs和诱饵蛋白的必要性.     

《Molecular Plant》文章中文摘要 2010年第3卷第5期

（http：//mplant.oxfordjournals.org/content/vol3/issue5/index.dtl）1 Zhang J,Zhou JM（2010）.Plant immumty triggered by microbial molecular signatures.Mol Plant,3（5）：783～793题目：微生物分子特征激活的植物免疫（综述）摘要：病原体/微生物相关分子模式（pathogen/microbe-associated molecular patterns,PAMPs/MAMPs）被位于宿主细胞表面的模式识别受体（pattern-recognition receptors,PRRs）识别来激活植物免疫。病原相关分子模式诱导的免疫反应（PAMP-triggered immunity,PTI）是植物限制病原菌增殖的第一层防卫反应。PTI信号传导元件往往被多种Pseudomonas syringae毒性效应蛋白作为攻击靶点,     

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

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

Of PAMPs and effectors: the blurred PTI-ETI dichotomy

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

Toward understanding of rice innate immunity against Magnaporthe oryzae

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

寄主植物与病原菌免疫反应的分子遗传基础

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

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

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

Plant immunity: Evolutionary insights from PBS1, Pto and RIN4

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

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

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

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

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