Evolution of Conifer Diterpene Synthases: Diterpene Resin Acid Biosynthesis in Lodgepole Pine and Jack Pine Involves Monofunctional and Bifunctional Diterpene Synthases

Abscisic acid (ABA) induces stomatal closure and inhibits light-induced stomatal opening. The mechanisms in these two processes are not necessarily the same. It has been postulated that the ABA receptors involved in opening inhibition are different from those involved in closure induction. Here, we provide evidence that four recently identified ABA receptors (PYRABACTIN RESISTANCE1 [PYR1], PYRABACTIN RESISTANCE-LIKE1 [PYL1], PYL2, and PYL4) are not sufficient for opening inhibition in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana). ABA-induced stomatal closure was impaired in the pyr1/pyl1/pyl2/pyl4 quadruple ABA receptor mutant. ABA inhibition of the opening of the mutant’s stomata remained intact. ABA did not induce either the production of reactive oxygen species and nitric oxide or the alkalization of the cytosol in the quadruple mutant, in accordance with the closure phenotype. Whole cell patch-clamp analysis of inward-rectifying K⁺ current in guard cells showed a partial inhibition by ABA, indicating that the ABA sensitivity of the mutant was not fully impaired. ABA substantially inhibited blue light-induced phosphorylation of H⁺-ATPase in guard cells in both the mutant and the wild type. On the other hand, in a knockout mutant of the SNF1-related protein kinase, srk2e, stomatal opening and closure, reactive oxygen species and nitric oxide production, cytosolic alkalization, inward-rectifying K⁺ current inactivation, and H⁺-ATPase phosphorylation were not sensitive to ABA.The phytohormone abscisic acid (ABA), which is synthesized in response to abiotic stresses, plays a key role in the drought hardiness of plants. Reducing transpirational water loss through stomatal pores is a major ABA response (Schroeder et al., 2001). ABA promotes the closure of open stomata and inhibits the opening of closed stomata. These effects are not simply the reverse of one another (Allen et al., 1999; Wang et al., 2001; Mishra et al., 2006).A class of receptors of ABA was identified (Ma et al., 2009; Park et al., 2009; Santiago et al., 2009; Nishimura et al., 2010). The sensitivity of stomata to ABA was strongly decreased in quadruple and sextuple mutants of the ABA receptor genes PYRABACTIN RESISTANCE/PYRABACTIN RESISTANCE-LIKE/REGULATORY COMPONENT OF ABSCISIC ACID RECEPTOR (PYR/PYL/RCAR; Nishimura et al., 2010; Gonzalez-Guzman et al., 2012). The PYR/PYL/RCAR receptors are involved in the early ABA signaling events, in which a sequence of interactions of the receptors with PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE 2Cs (PP2Cs) and subfamily 2 SNF1-RELATED PROTEIN KINASES (SnRK2s) leads to the activation of downstream ABA signaling targets in guard cells (Cutler et al., 2010; Kim et al., 2010; Weiner et al., 2010). Studies of Commelina communis and Vicia faba suggested that the ABA receptors involved in stomatal opening are not the same as the ABA receptors involved in stomatal closure (Allan et al., 1994; Anderson et al., 1994; Assmann, 1994; Schwartz et al., 1994). The roles of PYR/PYL/RCAR in either stomatal opening or closure remained to be elucidated.Blue light induces stomatal opening through the activation of plasma membrane H⁺-ATPase in guard cells that generates an inside-negative electrochemical gradient across the plasma membrane and drives K⁺ uptake through voltage-dependent inward-rectifying K⁺ channels (Assmann et al., 1985; Shimazaki et al., 1986; Blatt, 1987; Schroeder et al., 1987; Thiel et al., 1992). Phosphorylation of the penultimate Thr of the plasma membrane H⁺-ATPase is a prerequisite for blue light-induced activation of the H⁺-ATPase (Kinoshita and Shimazaki, 1999, 2002). ABA inhibits H⁺-ATPase activity through dephosphorylation of the penultimate Thr in the C terminus of the H⁺-ATPase in guard cells, resulting in prevention of the opening (Goh et al., 1996; Zhang et al., 2004; Hayashi et al., 2011). Inward-rectifying K⁺ currents (I_Kin) of guard cells are negatively regulated by ABA in addition to through the decline of the H⁺ pump-driven membrane potential difference (Schroeder and Hagiwara, 1989; Blatt, 1990; McAinsh et al., 1990; Schwartz et al., 1994; Grabov and Blatt, 1999; Saito et al., 2008). This down-regulation of ion transporters by ABA is essential for the inhibition of stomatal opening.A series of second messengers has been shown to mediate ABA-induced stomatal closure. Reactive oxygen species (ROS) produced by NADPH oxidases play a crucial role in ABA signaling in guard cells (Pei et al., 2000; Zhang et al., 2001; Kwak et al., 2003; Sirichandra et al., 2009; Jannat et al., 2011). Nitric oxide (NO) is an essential signaling component in ABA-induced stomatal closure (Desikan et al., 2002; Guo et al., 2003; Garcia-Mata and Lamattina, 2007; Neill et al., 2008). Alkalization of cytosolic pH in guard cells is postulated to mediate ABA-induced stomatal closure in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) and Pisum sativum and Paphiopedilum species (Irving et al., 1992; Gehring et al., 1997; Grabov and Blatt, 1997; Suhita et al., 2004; Gonugunta et al., 2008). These second messengers transduce environmental signals to ion channels and ion transporters that create the driving force for stomatal movements (Ward et al., 1995; MacRobbie, 1998; Garcia-Mata et al., 2003).In this study, we examined the mobilization of second messengers, the inactivation of I_Kin, and the suppression of H⁺-ATPase phosphorylation evoked by ABA in Arabidopsis mutants to clarify the downstream signaling events of ABA signaling in guard cells. The mutants included a quadruple mutant of PYR/PYL/RCARs, pyr1/pyl1/pyl2/pyl4, and a mutant of a SnRK2 kinase, srk2e.     

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.     

The Evolution of Mechanisms Driving the Stomatal Response to Vapor Pressure Deficit

Stomatal responses to vapor pressure deficit (VPD) are a principal means by which vascular land plants regulate daytime transpiration. While much work has focused on characterizing and modeling this response, there remains no consensus as to the mechanism that drives it. Explanations range from passive regulation by leaf hydration to biochemical regulation by the phytohormone abscisic acid (ABA). We monitored ABA levels, leaf gas exchange, and water status in a diversity of vascular land plants exposed to a symmetrical, mild transition in VPD. The stomata in basal lineages of vascular plants, including gymnosperms, appeared to respond passively to changes in leaf water status induced by VPD perturbation, with minimal changes in foliar ABA levels and no hysteresis in stomatal action. In contrast, foliar ABA appeared to drive the stomatal response to VPD in our angiosperm samples. Increased foliar ABA level at high VPD in angiosperm species resulted in hysteresis in the recovery of stomatal conductance; this was most pronounced in herbaceous species. Increased levels of ABA in the leaf epidermis were found to originate from sites of synthesis in other parts of the leaf rather than from the guard cells themselves. The transition from a passive regulation to ABA regulation of the stomatal response to VPD in the earliest angiosperms is likely to have had critical implications for the ecological success of this lineage.Plants continuously regulate transpiration by controlling the aperture of the stomatal pores on the surface of the leaf. The principal atmospheric determinant of stomatal aperture is the humidity of the air, which can be expressed as the vapor pressure difference between the leaf and the atmosphere. Stomatal responses to atmospheric vapor pressure deficit (VPD) have been well characterized across the diversity of vascular plant species (Darwin, 1898; Lange et al., 1971; Turner et al., 1984; Franks and Farquhar, 1999; Oren et al., 1999; Brodribb and McAdam, 2011; Mott and Peak, 2013), with stomata typically closing at high VPD and opening at low VPD. This comprehensive characterization has allowed for the development of highly effective empirical and mechanistic models of leaf gas exchange that provide robust predictions of the responses of transpiration to changes in VPD (Buckley et al., 2003; Katul et al., 2009; Damour et al., 2010; Medlyn et al., 2011). Despite the success of this modeling, the mechanism for the stomatal response to VPD remains poorly understood (Damour et al., 2010). Different hypotheses range from one extreme, whereby stomata respond passively through changes in leaf water content induced by the VPD or humidity perturbation (Lange et al., 1971; Mott and Peak, 2013), to the other extreme, whereby stomata close uniquely in response to the phytohormone abscisic acid (ABA; Xie et al., 2006; Bauer et al., 2013).From the earliest recognition that stomata open and close by changes in guard cell turgor (Heath, 1938), there have been many attempts to link the passive changes in water status that occur during VPD or humidity transitions with stomatal responses to VPD or humidity (Lange et al., 1971; Mott and Peak, 2013). Studies have suggested that changes in atmospheric water content passively drive stomatal responses by changing bulk leaf water status, which in turn changes guard cell turgor (Oren et al., 1999), or alternatively by changing guard cell turgor directly (Mott and Peak, 2013). Models based on these entirely passive processes are highly effective in predicting steady-state stomatal conductance (g_s) in response to changes in VPD or humidity in angiosperms (Mott and Peak, 2013).While hydraulic models provide robust predictions of steady-state g_s, they are less effective at predicting the dynamic responses of stomata to short-term perturbations, particularly with respect to the wrong-way responses that typically occur as transients (Buckley, 2005), as well as feed-forward behavior (Farquhar, 1978; Bunce, 1997; Franks et al., 1997; Tardieu and Simonneau, 1998; Ocheltree et al., 2014; compare with Mott and Peak, 2013). Although some of these models provide a pathway for incorporating the effect of ABA (Buckley, 2005), a lack of knowledge of ABA dynamics or action makes it difficult to integrate the influence of this active regulator of guard cell aperture into models. The stomatal behavior of single gene mutants (most notably the ABA synthesis and signaling mutants of Arabidopsis) strongly supports a role for ABA in mediating standard stomatal responses to changes in VPD. The stomata of these mutants are known to have less pronounced responses to a reduction in relative humidity compared with wild-type plants (Xie et al., 2006). Recently, molecular work has shown that guard cells express many of the genes required to synthesize ABA (Okamoto et al., 2009; Bauer et al., 2013), with molecular proxies for ABA level also indicating that the biochemical activity of ABA in the guard cell may increase following short-term exposure of leaves to a reduction in relative humidity (Waadt et al., 2014). These findings suggest a role for ABA in regulating stomatal responses to VPD and have led some to the conclusion that ABA synthesized autonomously by the guard cells is the predominant mechanism for stomatal responses to increased VPD (Bauer et al., 2013).Although the experimental evidence from molecular studies presents an argument for the role of ABA in the responses of stomata to changes in VPD, very few studies have quantified changes in ABA level in response to VPD. It is well established that ABA levels in leaves and guard cells can increase following the imposition of turgor loss or water stress (Pierce and Raschke, 1980; Harris et al., 1988; Harris and Outlaw, 1991). However, only a few studies have reported increases in foliar ABA level in response to high VPD (Bauerle et al., 2004; Giday et al., 2013), and none have investigated whether these observed dynamic changes or differences in ABA level were functionally relevant for stomatal control. In addition, no study has quantified the levels of ABA in guard cells during a transition in VPD.Here, we investigate the relative importance of ABA for the stomatal response to VPD in whole plants, sampled from across the vascular land plant lineage. We provide, to our knowledge, the first functional assessment of changes in ABA levels driving stomatal responses to VPD as well as critically investigate the recent suggestion that stomatal responses to VPD are driven by an autonomous guard cell synthesis of ABA.