RIN4 interacts with Pseudomonas syringae type III effector molecules and is required for RPM1-mediated resistance in Arabidopsis

In Arabidopsis, RPM1 confers resistance against Pseudomonas syringae expressing either of two sequence unrelated type III effectors, AvrRpm1 or AvrB. An RPM1-interacting protein (RIN4) coimmunoprecipitates from plant cell extracts with AvrB, AvrRpm1, or RPM1. Reduction of RIN4 protein levels inhibits both the hypersensitive response and the restriction of pathogen growth controlled by RPM1. RIN4 reduction causes diminution of RPM1. RIN4 reduction results in heightened resistance to virulent Peronospora parasitica and P. syringae, and ectopic defense gene expression. Thus, RIN4 positively regulates RPM1-mediated resistance yet is, formally, a negative regulator of basal defense responses. AvrRpm1 and AvrB induce RIN4 phosphorylation. This may enhance RIN4 activity as a negative regulator of plant defense, facilitating pathogen growth. RPM1 may "guard" against pathogens that use AvrRpm1 and AvrB to manipulate RIN4 activity.     

Rpa1 mediates an immune response to avrRpm1Psa and confers resistance against Pseudomonas syringae pv. actinidiae

The type three effector AvrRpm1_Pma from Pseudomonas syringae pv. maculicola (Pma) triggers an RPM1‐mediated immune response linked to phosphorylation of RIN4 (RPM1‐interacting protein 4) in Arabidopsis. However, the effector–resistance (R) gene interaction is not well established with different AvrRpm1 effectors from other pathovars. We investigated the AvrRpm1‐triggered immune responses in Nicotiana species and isolated Rpa1 (R esistance to P seudomonas syringae pv. a ctinidiae 1) via a reverse genetic screen in Nicotiana tabacum. Transient expression and gene silencing were performed in combination with co‐immunoprecipitation and growth assays to investigate the specificity of interactions that lead to inhibition of pathogen growth. Two closely related AvrRpm1 effectors derived from Pseudomonas syringae pv. actinidiae biovar 3 (AvrRpm1_Psa) and Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae strain B728a (AvrRpm1_Psy) trigger immune responses mediated by RPA1, a nucleotide‐binding leucine‐rich repeat protein with an N‐terminal coiled‐coil domain. In a display of contrasting specificities, RPA1 does not respond to AvrRpm1_Pma, and correspondingly AvrRpm1_Psa and AvrRpm1_Psy do not trigger the RPM1‐mediated response, demonstrating that separate R genes mediate specific immune responses to different AvrRpm1 effectors. AvrRpm1_Psa co‐immunoprecipitates with RPA1, and both proteins co‐immunoprecipitate with RIN4. In contrast with RPM1, however, RPA1 was not activated by the phosphomimic RIN4^T166D and silencing of RIN4 did not affect the RPA1 activity. Delivery of AvrRpm1_Psa by Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato (Pto) in combination with transient expression of Rpa1 resulted in inhibition of the pathogen growth in N. benthamiana. Psa growth was also inhibited by RPA1 in N. tabacum.     

Evolutionary Relationship of Disease Resistance Genes in Soybean and Arabidopsis Specific for the Pseudomonas syringae Effectors AvrB and AvrRpm1

In Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), the Pseudomonas syringae effector proteins AvrB and AvrRpm1 are both detected by the RESISTANCE TO PSEUDOMONAS MACULICOLA1 (RPM1) disease resistance (R) protein. By contrast, soybean (Glycine max) can distinguish between these effectors, with AvrB and AvrRpm1 being detected by the Resistance to Pseudomonas glycinea 1b (Rpg1b) and Rpg1r R proteins, respectively. We have been using these genes to investigate the evolution of R gene specificity and have previously identified RPM1 and Rpg1b. Here, we report the cloning of Rpg1r, which, like RPM1 and Rpg1b, encodes a coiled-coil (CC)-nucleotide-binding (NB)-leucine-rich repeat (LRR) protein. As previously found for Rpg1b, we determined that Rpg1r is not orthologous with RPM1, indicating that the ability to detect both AvrB and AvrRpm1 evolved independently in soybean and Arabidopsis. The tightly linked soybean Rpg1b and Rpg1r genes share a close evolutionary relationship, with Rpg1b containing a recombination event that combined a NB domain closely related to Rpg1r with CC and LRR domains from a more distantly related CC-NB-LRR gene. Using structural modeling, we mapped polymorphisms between Rpg1b and Rpg1r onto the predicted tertiary structure of Rpg1b, which revealed highly polymorphic surfaces within both the CC and LRR domains. Assessment of chimeras between Rpg1b and Rpg1r using a transient expression system revealed that AvrB versus AvrRpm1 specificity is determined by the C-terminal portion of the LRR domain. The P. syringae effector AvrRpt2, which targets RPM1 INTERACTOR4 (RIN4) proteins in both Arabidopsis and soybean, partially blocked recognition of both AvrB and AvrRpm1 in soybean, suggesting that both Rpg1b and Rpg1r may detect these effectors via modification of a RIN4 homolog.Effector triggered immunity in plants involves highly specific recognition events in which plant resistance (R) proteins detect pathogen effector proteins directly or, alternatively, the modifications that they induce on host proteins (Bonardi et al., 2012). The largest group of R proteins belongs to the nucleotide-binding (NB)-leucine-rich repeat (LRR) family (McHale et al., 2006). The NB-LRR family can be further subdivided based on N-terminal domains into the Toll-Interleukin and R protein (TIR) class and non-TIR-NB-LRR class (McHale et al., 2006). The latter most often contain a coiled-coil (CC) domain at the N terminus. The contributions of the TIR, CC, and LRR domains to R protein specificity, and how new specificities evolve, remain important questions.There are relatively few NB-LRR R proteins characterized to date that are thought to detect pathogen effectors directly; these include Pi-ta from rice (Oryza sativa), L and M variants from flax (Linum usitatissimum), and RESISTANCE TO RALSTONIA SOLANACEARUM1 and RESISTANCE TO PERONOSPORA PARASITICA1 (RPP1) from Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana; Jia et al., 2000; Deslandes et al., 2003; Dodds et al., 2006; Ueda et al., 2006; Catanzariti et al., 2010; Krasileva et al., 2010). In at least some of these examples, the R genes are found in clusters of NB-LRR paralogs in which multiple recognition specificities are represented (Ellis et al., 1995; Botella et al., 1998) or belong to allelic series (Ellis et al., 1995), arrangements that may promote evolution of recognition specificity via recombination between alleles and paralogs. Interestingly, sequence comparisons and domain swaps involving alleles at the L locus implicate both the LRR and TIR regions as determinants of recognition specificity (Ellis et al., 1999; Luck et al., 2000). Subsequently, domain swaps involving paralogs clustered at the barley (Hordeum vulgare) MILDEW A (MLA) and potato (Solanum tuberosum) Resistance to Potato Virus X (Rx)/Globodera pallida (Gpa) loci have provided additional support for the LRR domain playing a key role in conferring recognition specificity (Ellis et al., 1999; Luck et al., 2000; Shen et al., 2003; Rairdan and Moffett, 2006).Several R proteins are known to detect the presence of pathogen effectors indirectly by monitoring the activity of pathogen effectors within the plant cell. For example, the Arabidopsis RESISTANCE TO PSEUDOMONAS MACULICOLA1 (RPM1) and RESISTANCE TO PSEUDOMONAS SYRINGAE2 (RPS2) R proteins detect modification of the effector target RPM1 INTERACTOR4 (RIN4), while the Arabidopsis RPS5 protein detects modification of the effector target AvrPphB SUSCEPTIBLE1 (Mackey et al., 2002, 2003; Axtell and Staskawicz, 2003; Shao et al., 2003). At least for the well-studied examples in Arabidopsis, R proteins that employ indirect recognition mechanisms are encoded by NB-LRR genes that are not members of large clusters, or allelic series, with variants encoding distinct recognition specificities. Correlated with this genomic structure, such loci are typically relatively stable, with RPM1 and RPS5 existing as presence/absence polymorphisms that have been maintained over long evolutionary periods (Stahl et al., 1999; Tian et al., 2002). Both functional and nonfunctional alleles of RPS2 have been isolated, but only a single recognition specificity has been detected at this locus, despite sequence polymorphisms between alleles (Caicedo et al., 1999).Most likely, specificity for this class of R proteins is determined by a combination of the ability to associate with the host protein targeted by the effector and the ability to detect effector-induced modification of this target. Consistent with this hypothesis, it has been shown that the CC domains from at least some R proteins interact with the host proteins they are monitoring, even in the absence of pathogen effectors, in a prerecognition complex (Mackey et al., 2002; Ade et al., 2007). Hence, evolution of recognition specificity in R proteins that employ indirect recognition mechanisms may involve evolution of both the N-terminal CC and LRR domains.To better understand the evolution and function of R proteins that detect pathogen effectors indirectly, we have been studying two soybean (Glycine max) R genes, with known recognition specificities, that are members of a complex NB-LRR cluster. The R genes involved, Resistance to Pseudomonas glycinea 1b (Rpg1b) and Rpg1r, mediate detection of the Pseudomonas syringae effector proteins AvrB and AvrRpm1, respectively (Staskawicz et al., 1984; Ashfield et al., 1995). We have previously cloned Rpg1b, which is a CC-NB-LRR (CNL) gene that maps to a cluster of R genes effective against a diverse range of pathogens (Ashfield et al., 1998, 2004). Rpg1r is present in the same cluster and maps 0.56 centiMorgans from Rpg1b (Ashfield et al., 1995); however, the evolutionary relationship shared by the two R genes is not known. The cluster is associated with numerous NB-LRR genes, of both the CC and TIR subgroups, spread over more than a megabase of soybean chromosome 13 (Peñuela et al., 2002; Hayes et al., 2004; Innes et al., 2008; Ashfield et al., 2012; Wen et al., 2013). The NB-LRR family in this region is evolving rapidly, with duplications/deletions of paralogs, recombination, and positive selection all playing a role (Ashfield et al., 2012).While soybean can distinguish between AvrB and AvrRpm1, both effectors are detected by a single R protein, RPM1, in Arabidopsis (Bisgrove et al., 1994; Grant et al., 1995). It is known that RPM1 recognizes the effector proteins indirectly by detecting effector-dependent phosphorylation of a second Arabidopsis protein, RIN4 (Mackey et al., 2002; Chung et al., 2011; Liu et al., 2011). The available evidence suggests that a related strategy is employed by soybean, at least for the Rpg1b protein, despite the AvrB recognition specificity having evolved independently in these plant species (Ashfield et al., 2004; Selote and Kachroo, 2010; Selote et al., 2013). Soybean contains four RIN4 homologs (Chen et al., 2010), three of which interact physically with Rpg1b, with two required for full resistance conferred by this R gene (Selote and Kachroo, 2010; Selote et al., 2013). It is not known whether RIN4 homologs are required for Rpg1r function.Here, we report the map-based cloning of the soybean Rpg1r gene. Comparison of the Rpg1r protein to Rpg1b, combined with structural modeling, revealed highly polymorphic surfaces in the CC and LRR domains. Transient expression of chimeric Rpg1 proteins demonstrated that specificity for AvrB versus AvrRpm1 is determined by the C-terminal LRR region. Finally, we provide evidence that Rpg1r, like Rpg1b, detects its corresponding pathogen effector indirectly, most likely by monitoring a RIN4 homolog, indicating convergent evolution of recognition mechanisms in separate plant families.     

Specific threonine phosphorylation of a host target by two unrelated type III effectors activates a host innate immune receptor in plants

The Arabidopsis NB-LRR immune receptor RPM1 recognizes the Pseudomonas syringae type III effectors AvrB or AvrRpm1 to mount an immune response. Although neither effector is itself a kinase, AvrRpm1 and AvrB are known to target Arabidopsis RIN4, a negative regulator of basal plant defense, for phosphorylation. We show that RIN4 phosphorylation activates RPM1. RIN4(142-176) is necessary and, with appropriate localization sequences, sufficient to support effector-triggered RPM1 activation, with the threonine residue at position 166 being critical. Phosphomimic substitutions at T166 cause effector-independent RPM1 activation. RIN4 T166 is phosphorylated in vivo in the presence of AvrB or AvrRpm1. RIN4 mutants that lose interaction with AvrB cannot be coimmunoprecipitated with RPM1. This defines a common interaction platform required for RPM1 activation by phosphorylated RIN4 in response to pathogenic effectors. Conservation of an analogous threonine across all RIN4-like proteins suggests a key function for this residue beyond the regulation of RPM1.     

A receptor-like cytoplasmic kinase phosphorylates the host target RIN4, leading to the activation of a plant innate immune receptor

Plants have evolved sophisticated surveillance systems to recognize pathogen effectors delivered into host cells. RPM1 is an NB-LRR immune receptor that recognizes the Pseudomonas syringae effectors AvrB and AvrRpm1. Both effectors associate with and affect the phosphorylation of RIN4, an immune regulator. Although the kinase and the specific mechanisms involved are unclear, it has been hypothesized that RPM1 recognizes phosphorylated RIN4. Here, we identify RIPK as a RIN4-interacting receptor-like protein kinase that phosphorylates RIN4. In response to bacterial effectors, RIPK phosphorylates RIN4 at amino acid residues T21, S160, and T166. RIN4 phosphomimetic mutants display constitutive activation of RPM1-mediated defense responses and RIN4 phosphorylation is induced by AvrB and AvrRpm1 during P. syringae infection. RIPK knockout lines exhibit reduced RIN4 phosphorylation and blunted RPM1-mediated defense responses. Taken together, our results demonstrate that the RIPK kinase associates with and modifies an effector-targeted protein complex to initiate host immunity.     

RIN4-like proteins mediate resistance protein-derived soybean defense against Pseudomonas syringae

Resistance (R) protein mediated recognition of pathogen avirulence effectors triggers signaling that induces a very robust form of species-specific immunity in plants. The soybean Rpg1-b protein mediates this form of resistance against the bacterial blight pathogen, Pseudomonas syringae expressing AvrB_Pgyrace4. Likewise, the Arabidopsis RPM1 protein also mediates species-specific resistance against AvrB expressing bacteria. RPM1 and Rpg1-b are non-orthologous and differ in their requirements for downstream signaling components. We recently showed that the activation of Rpg1-b derived resistance signaling requires two host proteins that directly interact with AvrB. These proteins share high sequence similarity with the Arabidopsis RPM1 interacting protein 4 (RIN4), which is essential for RPM1-derived resistance. The two soybean RIN4-like proteins (GmRIN4a and b) differ in their abilities to interact with Rpg1-b as well as to complement the Arabidopsis rin4 mutation. Because the two GmRIN4 proteins interact with each other, we proposed that they might function as a heteromeric complex in mediating Rpg1-b-derived resistance. Absence of GmRIN4a or b enhanced basal resistance against bacterial and oomycete pathogens in soybean. Lack of GmRIN4a also enhanced the virulence of avrB bacteria in plants lacking Rpg1-b. Our studies suggest that multiple RIN4-like proteins proteins mediate R-mediated signaling, in soybean.Key words: AvrB, soybean defense, effector recognition, gaurdee, resistance protein, bacterial blight, gene silencingRecognition of pathogens in a species-specific manner results in the generation of a very robust mode of resistance in plants. This form of protection termed resistance (R) protein-mediated or effector-triggered immunity is induced when a plant encoded R protein “perceives” the presence of a pathogen-derived avirulence (Avr) effector. “Perception” occurs either via direct or indirect interactions between the R and Avr proteins.^1–7 One or more plant proteins, that themselves usually physically associate with the Avr and R proteins, mediate indirect R-Avr interactions. Such proteins have been termed “guardee” based upon the hypothesis that Avr-derived alterations of these proteins are guarded by R proteins.^5–7 First proposed to explain the perception of AvrPto_PtoJL1065 from Pseudomonas syringae in tomato,^8,9 the “guard” model has been extended to several other R-Avr interactions.^5,7,10 This mode of interaction is typified in the recognition of the Pseudomonas syringae AvrB effector by the Arabidopsis R protein, RPM1 (resistance to P. syringae pv. maculicola 1). RPM1 mediates resistance against bacteria expressing either AvrRpm1_PmaM6 or AvrB_Pgyrace4.¹¹ However, direct interactions between RPM1 and its cognate Avr proteins have not been detected. Rather, RPM1 associates with the host protein, RIN4 (RPM1-interacting 4), which in turn interacts with AvrRpm1 and AvrB. Consistent with its role as a “guardee” protein, RIN4 is required for RPM1-induced resistance and is phosphorylated by AvrRpm1/AvrB, albeit only in the presence of a plant-derived factor.¹² The phosphorylation status of RIN4 is likely monitored by RPM1 for the induction of resistance signaling. The “guard” model implies that unlike R proteins, “guardee” proteins are highly conserved. Indeed, RIN4-like proteins appear to be conserved in diverse plants including cowpea, lettuce, maize, potato, rice, tobacco and tomato.^13–16 Additionally, the tomato and lettuce RIN4 proteins are known to mediate defense against microbial pathogens.^14,15 However, due to the fact that “guardee” proteins have only been identified in the context of specific R-Avr pairs, their requirement in mediating responses to a common avirulence effector in diverse hosts has remained untested. We tested this corollary of the “guard” model in soybean since soybean too can induce resistance to AvrB expressing bacteria in an R gene-specific manner. We demonstrated that soybean does encode RIN4-like proteins and that these are important for mediating resistance to avrB P. syringae.¹⁷ This is an important finding since the soybean R protein Rpg1-b is non-orthologous to RPM1 and differs in its requirements for downstream signaling components.^18–21 Furthermore, unlike RPM1, Rpg1-b does not provide resistance against bacteria expressing the AvrRpm1 effector.²²Genome sequence search identified four genes encoding RIN4-like proteins in soybean, designated GmRIN4a-d. Both in planta bimolecular florescence complementation (BiFC) and in vitro “pull-down” assays detected binding between AvrB and all four GmRIN4 proteins, indicating that these interactions did not require additional plant-derived factors. Interactions were further confirmed by co-immunoprecipitation (Co-IP, Fig. 1). AvrB tagged with the FLAG (3X) epitope and the various GmRIN4 isoforms tagged with the MYC epitope were transiently expressed in Nicotiana benthamiana. Total protein extracts from leaves expressing AvrB-FLAG, GmRIN4a/b/c/d-MYC or co-expressing AvrB-FLAG with GmRIN4a/b/c/d-MYC proteins were used for immunoprecipitation with anti-FLAG antibodies. Immunoprecipitated proteins were visualized using anti-MYC antibodies in western blots (Fig. 1). Three of these (GmRIN4b, c and d) also interacted with Rpg1-b directly. However, GmRIN4a was unable to interact with Rpg1-b in planta or in vitro. Although GmRIN4a and b share very high amino acid identity (∼94%), only GmRIN4b interacted with Rpg1-b. However, silencing either GmRIN4a or b abrogated resistance to avrB bacteria in Rpg1-b plants, suggesting that both proteins were essential for the activation of Rpg1-b derived signaling.¹⁷ This raised the possibility that GmRIN4a and b might oligomerize to function in Rpg1-b-derived signaling. Indeed, GmRIN4b interacted with GmRIN4a as well as with GmRIN4c and d.¹⁷ GmRIN4b also interacted with itself. GmRIN4a, c and d neither interacted with each other, nor themselves. Together, these results suggest that the GmRIN4 isoforms might oligomerize. Whether the oligomer exists in the presence or absence of AvrB, and whether binding of one or the other isoform alters the dynamics of the complex to change affinities for Rpg1-b and/or AvrB, remains to be examined. The fact that the GmRIN4c and d isoforms also interact with Rpg1-b and that they associate with GmRIN4b raises the untested possibility that these too might function in Rpg1-b mediated resistance.Open in a separate windowFigure 1GmRIN4 proteins co-immunoprecipitate with AvrB. Agrobacterium cells expressing MYC-tagged GmRIN4a, b, c or d were expressed individually or together with FLAG (3X)-tagged AvrB in Nicotiana benthamiana. Proteins were immunoprecipitated (IP) from total extracts (T) using anti-FLAG antibodies, electrophoresed on SDS-PAGE and visualized using tagspecific antibodies (α-MYC for the various GmRIN4 proteins, α-FLAG for AvrB). Part showing AvrB is from the AvrB-GmRIN4a co-immunoprecipitation (Co-IP) experiment and is representative of Co-IPs with GmRIN4b, c and d.In Arabidopsis, RIN4 also associates with the RPS2 (resistance to P. syringae 2) protein, which mediates resistance against P. syringae expressing avrRpt2. RPS2-mediated signaling is activated when AvrRpt2_PtoJL1065, a cysteine protease, cleaves RIN4.^23–25 Since absence of RIN4 results in the ectopic induction of RPS2 activity and thereby lethality, the rin4 mutation can be generated only in plants lacking RPS2 (rps2). Absence of RIN4 also activates residual RPM1 activity.¹³ Therefore, rin4 rps2 plants exhibit increased PR-1 (pathogenesis related 1) gene expression and enhanced basal resistance to virulent bacteria. The residual RPM1 activity is not however sufficient to provide resistance against avrB or avrRpm1 expressing bacteria. Thus, rin4 rps2 plants are compromised in RPM1-derived resistance against the avrB/avrRpm1 bacterial strains. Interestingly, overexpression of GmRIN4b, but not GmRIN4a, was able to restore RPM1 function in the Arabidopsis rin4 rps2 mutant. Pathogen inoculation of transgenic Arabidopsis rin4 rps2 mutant plants constitutively expressing GmRIN4a showed that these plants were as susceptible to avrB or avrRpm1 P. syringae as the rin4 rps2 mutant. In contrast, the 35S-GmRIN4b transgenic plants accumulated similar avrB or avrRpm1 bacteria as wild-type (ecotype Col-0) plants. Likewise, transgenic overexpression of GmRIN4b, but not GmRIN4a was able to complement the ecotopic induction of defenses in the rin4 rps2 mutant. The failure of GmRIN4a to complement the rin4 was not related to interaction with the R protein; both GmRIN4a and b associated with RPM1 as well as AvrRpm1 in BiFC¹⁷ as well as Co-IP assays (Fig. 2). Deciphering the reason underlying inability of GmRIN4a to complement the rin4 mutation should provide important insights into the RIN4 dependent activation of RPM1 activity.Open in a separate windowFigure 2GmRIN4 proteins co-immunoprecipitate with RPM1 (A) and AvrRpm1 (B). Agrobacterium cells expressing MYC tagged GmRIN4a, b, c or d were expressed individually (GmRIN4) or together with 3XFLAG tagged AvrRpm1 (A) or RPM1 (B) in Nicotiana benthamiana. Proteins were immunoprecipitated (IP) from total extracts (T) using anti-FLAG antibodies. Proteins were visualized on western blots using tag-specific antibodies. Parts showing RPM1 and AvrRpm1 are from co-immunoprecipitation (Co-IP) experiments with GmRIN4a and are representative of Co-IPs with GmRIN4b, c and d.Interestingly, silencing either GmRIN4a or b enhanced resistance to virulent strains of P. syringae and the oomycete pathogen Phytophthora sojae in soybean. This suggested that both GmRIN4a and b contributed to basal defense in soybean. Increased basal defense in the GmRIN4a/b-silenced plants could not be attributed to residual Rpg1-b activity since the enhanced resistance phenotype was observed in the rpg1-b background (cv. Essex). Furthermore, the GmRIN4a- or b-silenced Rpg1-b plants (cv. Harosoy) accumulated similar levels of virulent bacteria as the control plants (Fig. 3). However, the possibility that loss of GmRIN4a or b activates other unidentified R proteins in the Essex cultivar cannot be ruled out. Assessing resistance in different genetic backgrounds lacking GmRIN4a and/or b will help clarify this. Inoculation of the GmRIN4a- or b-silenced rpg1-b plants with avrB bacteria showed that neither GmRIN4a nor b was required for the virulence function of AvrB; presence of AvrB enhanced bacterial growth on both GmRIN4a- and b-silenced rpg1-b plants. Interestingly, avrB bacteria were even more virulent on the GmRIN4a-silenced rpg1-b plants as compared to the control or GmRIN4b-silenced rpg1-b plants. These data suggest that GmRIN4a might negatively regulate the virulence function of AvrB. Analyzing the effects of GmRIN4a overexpression in the rpg1-b background will help clarify this.Open in a separate windowFigure 3Silencing GmRIN4a or b does not enhance resistance to virulent Pseudomonas syrinage in Rpg1-b (cv. Harosoy) plants. Bacterial counts in plants silenced for GmRIN4a (S_4a) or GmRIN4b (S_4b) as compared to vector-inoculated (V) plants. LOG values of colony forming units (CFU) per unit leaf area from infected leaves at 0 or 4 days post-inoculation (dpi) are presented. Error bars indicate standard deviation (n = 5).     

SGT1b is required for HopZ3-mediated suppression of the epiphytic growth of Pseudomonas syringae on N. benthamiana

Type III secreted effectors shape the potential of bacterial pathogens to cause disease on plants. Some effectors affect pathogen growth only in specific niches. For example, HopZ3 causes reduced epiphytic growth of Pseudomonas syringae strain B728a on Nicotiana benthamiana. This raises the question of whether genes important for effector-triggered disease resistance are needed for responses to effectors whose major effect is in the epiphytic niche. We report that SGT1b, a protein known to be important for defense activation, is essential for HopZ3-mediated suppression of PsyB728a epiphytic growth. SGT1b is required for HopZ3- and AvrB3-induced cell death in N. benthamiana plants that express the Pto resistance gene from tomato. We suggest that HopZ3 activates R gene mediated responses in N. benthamiana.     

RPG1-B-Derived Resistance to AvrB-Expressing Pseudomonas syringae Requires RIN4-Like Proteins in Soybean

Soybean (Glycine max) RPG1-B (for resistance to Pseudomonas syringae pv glycinea) mediates species-specific resistance to P. syringae expressing the avirulence protein AvrB, similar to the nonorthologous RPM1 in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana). RPM1-derived signaling is presumably induced upon AvrB-derived modification of the RPM1-interacting protein, RIN4 (for RPM1-interacting 4). We show that, similar to RPM1, RPG1-B does not directly interact with AvrB but associates with RIN4-like proteins from soybean. Unlike Arabidopsis, soybean contains at least four RIN4-like proteins (GmRIN4a to GmRIN4d). GmRIN4b, but not GmRIN4a, complements the Arabidopsis rin4 mutation. Both GmRIN4a and GmRIN4b bind AvrB, but only GmRIN4b binds RPG1-B. Silencing either GmRIN4a or GmRIN4b abrogates RPG1-B-derived resistance to P. syringae expressing AvrB. Binding studies show that GmRIN4b interacts with GmRIN4a as well as with two other AvrB/RPG1-B-interacting isoforms, GmRIN4c and GmRIN4d. The lack of functional redundancy among GmRIN4a and GmRIN4b and their abilities to interact with each other suggest that the two proteins might function as a heteromeric complex in mediating RPG1-B-derived resistance. Silencing GmRIN4a or GmRIN4b in rpg1-b plants enhances basal resistance to virulent strains of P. syringae and the oomycete Phytophthora sojae. Interestingly, GmRIN4a- or GmRIN4b-silenced rpg1-b plants respond differently to AvrB-expressing bacteria. Although both GmRIN4a and GmRIN4b function to monitor AvrB in the presence of RPG1-B, GmRIN4a, but not GmRIN4b, negatively regulates AvrB virulence activity in the absence of RPG1-B.One of the myriad plant defense responses activated upon pathogen invasion is signaling induced via the activation of resistance (R) proteins. R gene-mediated resistance is generally activated in response to race-specific pathogen effectors, termed avirulence proteins (Avr), and often results in the development of a hypersensitive reaction at the site of pathogen entry (Dangl et al., 1996). The hypersensitive reaction is a form of programmed cell death that results in the formation of necrotic lesions around the site of pathogen entry and is thought to help prevent pathogen spread by confining it to the dead cells.A majority of the known R proteins contain conserved structural domains, including N-terminal coiled coil (CC) or Toll-interleukin 1 receptor (TIR)-like domains, central nucleotide-binding site (NBS), and C-terminal Leu-rich repeat (LRR) domains (Martin et al., 2003). While some R proteins “perceive” pathogen presence via direct physical interactions with the cognate Avr proteins (Scofield et al., 1996; Jia et al., 2000; Leister and Katagiri, 2000; Deslandes et al., 2003), several others likely do so indirectly. This led to the suggestion that R proteins monitor the presence of Avr proteins by “guarding” other host proteins targeted by the pathogen effector (Van der Biezen and Jones, 1998; Innes, 2004; Jones and Dangl, 2006). Avr proteins enhance pathogen virulence in genetic backgrounds lacking cognate R proteins by targeting components of the host basal defense machinery, including “guardee” proteins (Chang et al., 2000; Guttman and Greenberg, 2001; Chen et al., 2004, Kim et al., 2005b; Ong and Innes, 2006; van Esse et al., 2007; Shan et al., 2008; Xiang et al., 2008). However, some Avr proteins were found to also target host proteins that do not contribute to the virulence function of the effector (Shang et al., 2006; Shabab et al., 2008; Zhou and Chai, 2008; Zipfel and Rathjen, 2008). This led to the proposition that plants express “decoy” proteins that mimic Avr-guardee recognition in the presence of the R protein. This decoy model suggests that, unlike guardees, decoy proteins do not directly contribute to host basal immunity, such that Avr-derived alterations of decoys do not enhance pathogen virulence in plants lacking the R protein (van der Hoorn and Kamoun, 2008).A well-studied example of an indirect mode of effector recognition is that of the Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) R protein, RPM1 (for resistance to Pseudomonas syringae pv maculicola 1). RPM1 mediates resistance against bacteria expressing two different Avr proteins, AvrRpm1 (AvrRpm1_PmaM6) and AvrB (AvrB1_Pgyrace4). Although RPM1 does not directly interact with either AvrRpm1 or AvrB, it does associate with RIN4 (for RPM1-interacting 4), which interacts with AvrRpm1 and AvrB. RIN4 is required for RPM1-induced resistance to AvrRpm1/AvrB-expressing P. syringae (Mackey et al., 2002). Both AvrRpm1 and AvrB induce the phosphorylation of RIN4, which is thought to induce RPM1-mediated resistance signaling. RIN4 also associates with a second Arabidopsis R protein, RPS2 (for resistance to P. syringae), which mediates resistance against P. syringae expressing AvrRpt2. RPS2-mediated signaling is activated when AvrRpt2 (AvrRpt2_PtoJL1065), a Cys protease, cleaves RIN4 (Axtell and Staskawicz, 2003; Mackey et al., 2003; Kim et al., 2005a). The AvrRpt2-triggered loss of RIN4 compromises RPM1-mediated resistance, because RIN4 is not available for phosphorylation (Ritter and Dangl, 1996; Axtell and Staskawicz, 2003; Mackey et al., 2003).The avirulence effector AvrB was first isolated from a P. syringae strain colonizing soybean (Glycine max) and used to identify the cognate resistance locus RPG1 in soybean (Staskawicz et al., 1987; Keen and Buzzell, 1991). This locus contains the RPG1-B (for resistance to P. syringae pv glycinea) gene, which encodes a CC-NBS-LRR protein conferring resistance to AvrB-expressing P. syringae in soybean (Bisgrove et al., 1994; Ashfield et al., 2004). Unlike RPM1, RPG1-B does not confer specificity to AvrRpm1 (Ashfield et al., 1995). However, as in Arabidopsis, the soybean RPG1-B-derived hypersensitive reaction to AvrB-expressing bacteria is inhibited by the presence of AvrRpt2-expressing bacteria (Axtell and Staskawicz, 2003, Mackey et al., 2003; Ashfield et al., 2004). This suggests that RPG1-B and RPM1 might utilize common signaling components even though they share very limited sequence identity. Therefore, we investigated the possible involvement of RIN4-like proteins in RPG1-B-mediated resistance signaling. In addition to Arabidopsis, RIN4-like proteins have also been identified in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) and lettuce (Lactuca sativa; Jeuken et al., 2009; Luo et al., 2009). In tomato, the NBS-LRR protein, Prf (for Pseudomonas resistance and fenthion sensitivity), and its interacting protein kinase, Pto, mediate resistance to the AvrPto (AvrPto1_PtoJL1065)-expressing strain of P. syringae (Scofield et al., 1996; Tang et al., 1996; Kim et al., 2002; Mucyn et al., 2006). AvrPto binds RIN4 proteins from both Arabidopsis (AtRIN4) and tomato (SlRIN4). Similar to AvrRpt2, AvrPto induces the proteolysis of RIN4, albeit only in the presence of Pto and Prf (Luo et al., 2009). However, in the case of AvrPto, degradation of RIN4 is the result of induced proteolytic activity in the plant, rather than that of AvrPto itself. In Lactuca (lettuce) species, the L. saligna RIN4 allele was recently shown to be essential for resistance to an avirulent strain of the downy mildew pathogen, Bremia lactucae (Jeuken et al., 2009).Here, we report that two functionally nonredundant isoforms of soybean RIN4 (GmRIN4) function in RPG1-B-derived resistance as well as in the virulence activity of AvrB in the absence of RPG1-B.     

Phosphorylation of the Plant Immune Regulator RPM1-INTERACTING PROTEIN4 Enhances Plant Plasma Membrane H+-ATPase Activity and Inhibits Flagellin-Triggered Immune Responses in Arabidopsis

The Pseudomonas syringae effector AvrB targets multiple host proteins during infection, including the plant immune regulator RPM1-INTERACTING PROTEIN4 (RIN4) and RPM1-INDUCED PROTEIN KINASE (RIPK). In the presence of AvrB, RIPK phosphorylates RIN4 at Thr-21, Ser-160, and Thr-166, leading to activation of the immune receptor RPM1. Here, we investigated the role of RIN4 phosphorylation in susceptible Arabidopsis thaliana genotypes. Using circular dichroism spectroscopy, we show that RIN4 is a disordered protein and phosphorylation affects protein flexibility. RIN4 T21D/S160D/T166D phosphomimetic mutants exhibited enhanced disease susceptibility upon surface inoculation with P. syringae, wider stomatal apertures, and enhanced plasma membrane H⁺-ATPase activity. The plasma membrane H⁺-ATPase AHA1 is highly expressed in guard cells, and its activation can induce stomatal opening. The ripk knockout also exhibited a strong defect in pathogen-induced stomatal opening. The basal level of RIN4 Thr-166 phosphorylation decreased in response to immune perception of bacterial flagellin. RIN4 Thr166D lines exhibited reduced flagellin-triggered immune responses. Flagellin perception did not lower RIN4 Thr-166 phosphorylation in the presence of strong ectopic expression of AvrB. Taken together, these results indicate that the AvrB effector targets RIN4 in order to enhance pathogen entry on the leaf surface as well as dampen responses to conserved microbial features.     

AvrB mutants lose both virulence and avirulence activities on soybean and Arabidopsis

The Pseudomonas syringae pv. glycinea effector protein AvrB induces resistance responses in soybean varieties that contain the resistance gene Rpg1-b and Arabidopsis varieties that carry RPM1. In addition to this avirulence activity, AvrB also enhances bacterial virulence on soybean plants that lack Rpg1-b and induces a chlorotic phenotype on Arabidopsis plants that lack RPM1. We screened a library of avrB mutants for loss of avirulence on soybean and Arabidopsis, and assayed selected avirulence mutants for loss of virulence on both plants. All mutants screened were recognized similarly on both plant species. Nine single-site avrB mutations that affected avirulence localized to a solvent-accessible pocket in the protein structure. Seven of these mutated residues are absolutely conserved between AvrB and its nine homologues. Avirulence mutants generally lost virulence enhancement on susceptible soybean varieties and lost the ability to induce a chlorotic response on the rpm1 null Arabidopsis variety Mt-0. Three of four avirulence mutants tested failed to interact with RIN4, an Arabidopsis protein previously shown to be required for RPM1 function. Our results suggest that soybean and Arabidopsis recognize AvrB in the same manner, and that AvrB enzymatic activity is required for its function as an avirulence and virulence effector on two different plant species.     

Arabidopsis RIN4 negatively regulates disease resistance mediated by RPS2 and RPM1 downstream or independent of the NDR1 signal modulator and is not required for the virulence functions of bacterial type III effectors AvrRpt2 or AvrRpm1

Bacterial pathogens deliver type III effector proteins into the plant cell during infection. On susceptible (r) hosts, type III effectors can contribute to virulence. Some trigger the action of specific disease resistance (R) gene products. The activation of R proteins can occur indirectly via modification of a host target. Thus, at least some type III effectors are recognized at site(s) where they may act as virulence factors. These data indicate that a type III effector's host target might be required for both initiation of R function in resistant plants and pathogen virulence in susceptible plants. In Arabidopsis thaliana, RPM1-interacting protein 4 (RIN4) associates with both the Resistance to Pseudomonas syringae pv maculicola 1 (RPM1) and Resistance to P. syringae 2 (RPS2) disease resistance proteins. RIN4 is posttranslationally modified after delivery of the P. syringae type III effectors AvrRpm1, AvrB, or AvrRpt2 to plant cells. Thus, RIN4 may be a target for virulence functions of these type III effectors. We demonstrate that RIN4 is not the only host target for AvrRpm1 and AvrRpt2 in susceptible plants because its elimination does not diminish their virulence functions. In fact, RIN4 negatively regulates AvrRpt2 virulence function. RIN4 also negatively regulates inappropriate activation of both RPM1 and RPS2. Inappropriate activation of RPS2 is nonspecific disease resistance 1 (NDR1) independent, in contrast with the established requirement for NDR1 during AvrRpt2-dependent RPS2 activation. Thus, RIN4 acts either cooperatively, downstream, or independently of NDR1 to negatively regulate RPS2 in the absence of pathogen. We propose that many P. syringae type III effectors have more than one target in the host cell. We suggest that a limited set of these targets, perhaps only one, are associated with R proteins. Thus, whereas any pathogen virulence factor may have multiple targets, the perturbation of only one is necessary and sufficient for R activation.     

Rpr1, a gene required for Rpg1-dependent resistance to stem rust in barley

Rpg1 is a stem rust resistance gene that has protected barley from severe losses for over 60 years in the US and Canada. It confers resistance to many, but not all, pathotypes of the stem rust fungus Puccinia graminis f. sp. tritici. A fast neutron induced deletion mutant, showing susceptibility to stem rust pathotype Pgt-MCC, was identified in barley cv. Morex, which carries Rpg1. Genetic and Rpg1 mRNA and protein expression level analyses showed that the mutation was a suppressor of Rpg1 and was designated Rpr1 (Required for P. graminis resistance). Genome-wide expression profiling, using the Affymetrix Barley1 GeneChip containing ∼22,840 probe sets, was conducted with Morex and the rpr1 mutant. Of the genes represented on the Barley1 microarray, 20 were up-regulated and 33 were down-regulated by greater than twofold in the mutant, while the Rpg1 mRNA level remained constant. Among the highly down-regulated genes (greater than fourfold), genomic PCR, RT-PCR and Southern analyses identified that three genes (Contig4901_s_at, HU03D17U_s_at, and Contig7061_s_at), were deleted in the rpr1 mutant. These three genes mapped to chromosome 4(4H) bin 5 and co-segregated with the rpr1-mediated susceptible phenotype. The loss of resistance was presumed to be due to a mutation in one or more of these genes. However, the possibility exists that there are other genes within the deletions, which are not represented on the Barley1 GeneChip. The Rpr1 gene was not required for Rpg5- and rpg4-mediated stem rust resistance, indicating that it shows specificity to the Rpg1-mediated resistance pathway.     

Proteolysis of a Negative Regulator of Innate Immunity Is Dependent on Resistance Genes in Tomato and Nicotiana benthamiana and Induced by Multiple Bacterial Effectors

RPM1-interacting protein 4 (RIN4), a negative regulator of the basal defense response in plants, is targeted by multiple bacterial virulence effectors. We show that RIN4 degradation is induced by the effector AvrPto from Pseudomonas syringae and that this degradation in Solanaceous plants is dependent on the resistance protein, Pto, a protein kinase, and Prf, a nucleotide binding site–leucine-rich repeat protein. Our data demonstrate overlap between two of the best-characterized pathways for recognition of pathogen virulence effectors in plants. RIN4 interacts with multiple plant signaling components and bacterial effectors in yeast and in planta. AvrPto induces an endogenous proteolytic activity in both tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) and Nicotiana benthamiana that degrades RIN4 and requires the consensus site cleaved by the protease effector AvrRpt2. The interaction between AvrPto and Pto, but not the kinase activity of Pto, is required for proteolysis of RIN4. Analysis of many of the effectors comprising the secretome of P. syringae pv tomato DC3000 led to the identification of two additional sequence-unrelated effectors that can also induce degradation of RIN4. Therefore, multiple bacterial effectors besides AvrRpt2 elicit proteolysis of RIN4 in planta.     

Rpg1, a soybean gene effective against races of bacterial blight, maps to a cluster of previously identified disease resistance genes

 Alleles, or tightly linked genes, at the soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.) Rpg1 locus confer resistance to races of Pseudomonas syringae pv. glycinea that express the avirulence genes avrB or avrRpm1. In this study we demonstrate that Rpg1 maps to a cluster of previously identified resistance genes, including those effective against fungal, viral and nematode pathogens. Rpg1 is in molecular linkage group (MLG) F, flanked by the markers K644 and B212. The RFLP markers R45, php2265 and php2385 cosegregated with Rpg1, as did the marker nbs61, which encodes a protein related to previously isolated resistance genes. Received: 7 July 1997 / Accepted: 6 October 1997     

A duplicated pair of Arabidopsis RING-finger E3 ligases contribute to the RPM1- and RPS2-mediated hypersensitive response

The Arabidopsis RPM1 protein confers resistance to disease caused by Pseudomonas syringae strains delivering either the AvrRpm1 or AvrB type III effector proteins into host cells. We characterized two closely related RPM1-interacting proteins, RIN2 and RIN3. RIN2 and RIN3 encode RING-finger type ubiquitin ligases with six apparent transmembrane domains and an ubiquitin-binding CUE domain. RIN2 and RIN3 are orthologs of the mammalian autocrine motility factor receptor, a cytokine receptor localized in both plasma membrane caveolae and the endoplasmic reticulum. RIN2 is predominantly localized to the plasma membrane, as are RPM1 and RPS2. The C-terminal regions of RIN2 and RIN3, including the CUE domain, interact strongly with an RPM1 N-terminal fragment and weakly with a similar domain from the Arabidopsis RPS2 protein. RIN2 and RIN3 can dimerize through their C-terminal regions. The RING-finger domains of RIN2 and RIN3 encode ubiquitin ligases. Inoculation with P. syringae DC3000(avrRpm1) or P. syringae DC3000(avrRpt2) induces differential decreases of RIN2 mobility in SDS-PAGE and disappearance of the majority of RIN2. A rin2 rin3 double mutant expresses diminished RPM1- and RPS2-dependent hypersensitive response (HR), but no alteration of pathogen growth. Thus, the RIN2/RIN3 RING E3 ligases apparently act on a substrate that regulates RPM1- and RPS2-dependent HR.     

Fungal effector SIB1 of Colletotrichum orbiculare has unique structural features and can suppress plant immunity in Nicotiana benthamiana

Fungal plant pathogens secrete virulence-related proteins, called effectors, to establish host infection; however, the details are not fully understood yet. Functional screening of effector candidates using Agrobacterium-mediated transient expression assay in Nicotiana benthamiana identified two virulence-related effectors, named SIB1 and SIB2 (Suppression of Immunity in N. benthamiana), of an anthracnose fungus Colletotrichum orbiculare, which infects both cucurbits and N. benthamiana. The Agrobacterium-mediated transient expression of SIB1 or SIB2 increased the susceptibility of N. benthamiana to C. orbiculare, which suggested these effectors can suppress immune responses in N. benthamiana. The presence of SIB1 and SIB2 homologs was found to be limited to the genus Colletotrichum. SIB1 suppressed both (i) the generation of reactive oxygen species triggered by two different pathogen-associated molecular patterns, chitin and flg22, and (ii) the cell death response triggered by the Phytophthora infestans INF1 elicitin in N. benthamiana. We determined the NMR-based structure of SIB1 to obtain its structural insights. The three-dimensional structure of SIB1 comprises five β-strands, each containing three disulfide bonds. The overall conformation was found to be a cylindrical shape, such as the well-known antiparallel β-barrel structure. However, the β-strands were found to display a unique topology, one pair of these β-strands formed a parallel β-sheet. These results suggest that the effector SIB1 present in Colletotrichum fungi has unique structural features and can suppress pathogen-associated molecular pattern–triggered immunity in N. benthamiana.     

Nicotiana species as surrogate host for studying the pathogenicity of Acidovorax citrulli,the causal agent of bacterial fruit blotch of cucurbits

Bacterial fruit blotch (BFB) caused by Acidovorax citrulli is one of the most important bacterial diseases of cucurbits worldwide. However, the mechanisms associated with A. citrulli pathogenicity and genetics of host resistance have not been extensively investigated. We idenitfied Nicotiana benthamiana and Nicotiana tabacum as surrogate hosts for studying A. citrulli pathogenicity and non-host resistance triggered by type III secreted (T3S) effectors. Two A. citrulli strains, M6 and AAC00-1, that represent the two major groups amongst A. citrulli populations, induced disease symptoms on N. benthamiana, but triggered a hypersensitive response (HR) on N. tabacum plants. Transient expression of 19 T3S effectors from A. citrulli in N. benthamiana leaves revealed that three effectors, Aave_1548, Aave_2708, and Aave_2166, trigger water-soaking-like cell death in N. benthamiana. Aave_1548 knockout mutants of M6 and AAC00-1 displayed reduced virulence on N. benthamiana and melon (Cucumis melo L.). Transient expression of Aave_1548 and Aave_2166 effectors triggered a non-host HR in N. tabacum, which was dependent on the functionality of the immune signalling component, NtSGT1. Hence, employing Nicotiana species as surrogate hosts for studying A. citrulli pathogenicity may help characterize the function of A. citrulli T3S effectors and facilitate the development of new strategies for BFB management.