The chemical cross talk between rice and barnyardgrass

The chemical cross talk between rice and barnyardgrass which is one of the most noxious weeds in rice cultivation was investigated. Allelopathic activity of rice was increased by the presence of barnyardgrass seedlings or barnyardgrass root exudates. Rice allelochemical, momilactone B, concentration in rice seedlings and momilactone B secretion level from rice were also increased by the presence of barnyardgrass seedlings or barnyardgrass root exudates. As momilactone B possesses strong growth inhibitory activity and acts as an allelochemical, barnyardgrass-induced rice allelopathy may be due to the increased momilactone B secretion. These results suggest that rice may respond to the presence of neighboring barnyardgrass by sensing the chemical components in barnyardgrass root exudates and increase allelopathic activity by elevated production and secretion levels of momilactone B. Thus, rice allelopathy may be one of the inducible defense mechanisms by chemical-mediated plant interaction between rice and barnyardgrass and the induced-allelopathy may provide a competitive advantage for rice through suppression of the growth of barnyardgrass.Key words: allelopathy, Echinochloa, chemical interaction, induced-allelopathy, momilactone, Oryza sativaThe chemical cross talk between host and symbiotic or parasitic plants is an essential process for the development of physical connections in symbiosis and parasitism.^1–3 Barnyardgrass is one of the most common and noxious weeds in rice paddy fields.⁴ Although barnyardgrass is adapted rice production system due to its similarity in growth habit, the reason why barnyardgrass so often invades into the rice paddy fields is unknown. There might be some special interactions between both plant species.Plants are able to accumulate phytoalexins around infection sites of pathogens soon after sensing elicitors of pathogen origin. This accumulation of phytoalexins can protect the plants from further pathogen infection.^5,6 Plants are also able to activate defense mechanisms against attacking herbivores by sensing volatile compounds, such as methacrolein and methyl jasmonate, released by herbivore-attacked plant cells. The volatile-sensed plants increase the production of phenolics, alkaloids, terpenes and defense proteins, which reduce herbivory attacks.^7,8 Therefore, plants are able to elevate the defense mechanisms against several biotic stress conditions by detection of various compounds.Allelopathy is the direct influence of organic chemicals released from plants on the growth and development of other plants.^9–11 Allelochemicals are such organic chemicals involved in the allelopathy.^12,13 Allelochemicals can provide a competitive advantage for host-plants through suppression of soil microorganism and inhibition of the growth of competing plant species because of their antibacterial, antifungal and growth inhibitory activities.^3,14,15Rice has been extensively studied with respect to its allelopathy as part of a strategy for sustainable weed management, such as breeding allelopathic rice strains. A large number of rice varieties were found to inhibit the growth of several plant species when these rice varieties were grown together with these plants under the field or/and laboratory conditions.^16–20 These findings suggest that rice may produce and release allelochemicals into the neighboring environments and may inhibit the growth of the neighboring plants by the allelochemicals.Potent allelochemical, momilactone B, was isolated from rice root exudates.²¹ Momilactone B inhibits the growth of typical rice weeds like barnyardgrass and Echinochloa colonum at concentrations greater than 1 µM and the toxicity of momilactone B to rice itself was very low.²² In addition, rice plants secrete momilactone B from the roots into the rhizosphere over their entire life cycle.²² The observations suggest rice allelopathy may be primarily dependant on the secretion levels of momilactone B from the rice seedlings.^22,23Allelopathic activity of rice exhibited 5.3- to 6.3-fold increases when rice and barnyardgrass seedlings were grown together. Root exudates of barnyardgrass seedlings also increased allelopathic activity and momilactone B concentration in rice seedlings. The increasing the exudate concentration increased the allelopathic activity and momilactone B concentration in rice.²⁴ Thus, the chemical components in barnyardgrass root exudates may affect gene expressions involved in momilactone B biosynthesis. However, effects of the barnyardgrass root exudates on the secretion level of mimilactone B from rice has not yet reported.Rice seedlings were incubated in the medium containing barnyardgrass root exudates for 10 d, and secretion level of momilactone B by rice was determined (Fig. 1). The root exudates increased the secretion level significantly at concentrations greater than 30 mg/L of barnyardgrass root exudates, and increasing the concentration increased the secretion level. At concentrations of 300 mg/L of the root exudates, the secretion level was 10-fold greater than that in control (0 mg of root exudate). There was no significant difference in the osmotic potential between the medium contained barnyardgrass root exudates and control medium (all about 10 mmol/kg), and pH value of the medium was maintained at 6.0 throughout the experiments.²⁵ These results suggest that unknown chemical components in the barnyardgrass root exudates may induce the secretion of momilactone B from rice. As momilactone B possesses strong phytotoxic and allelopathic activities,^21–23,25 the elevated production and secretion of momilactone B in rice may provide a competitive advantage for root establishment through local suppression of pathogens and inhibition of the growth of competing plant species including barnyardgrass. Thus, barnyardgrass-induced rice allelopathy may be caused by the chemical components in the barnyardgrass root exudates.Open in a separate windowFigure 1Effects of barnyardgrass root exudates on momilactone B secretion level in rice. Rice seedlings were incubated in the medium containing barnyardgrass root exudates for 10 d, and secretion level of momilactone B was determined as described by Kato-Noguchi.²⁴ The experiment was repeated six times with three assays for each determination. Different letters show significant difference (p < 0.01) according to Tukey''s HSD test.Although mechanisms of the exudation are not well understood, it is suggested that plants are able to secrete a wide variety of compounds from root cells by plasmalemma-derived exudation, endoplasmic-derived exudation and proton-pumping mechanisms.^3,15 Through the root exudation of compounds, plants are able to regulate the soil microbial community in their immediate vicinity, change the chemical and physical properties of the soil, and inhibit the growth of competing plant species.^3,14,15 The present research suggests that rice may be aware of the presence of neighboring barnyardgrass by detection of certain key in barnyardgrass root exudates, and this sensorial function may trigger a signal cascade resulting in increasing rice allelopathy through increasing production of momilactone B and secretion of momilactone B into the rhizosphere. Therefore, rice allelopathy may potentially be an inducible defense mechanism by chemical-mediated plant interactions between rice and barnyardgrass.     

ARF-GTPase as a Molecular Switch for Polar Auxin Transport Mediated by Vesicle Trafficking in Root Development

Polar auxin transport (PAT), which is controlled precisely by both auxin efflux and influx facilitators and mediated by the cell trafficking system, modulates organogenesis, development and root gravitropism. ADP-ribosylation factor (ARF)-GTPase protein is catalyzed to switch to the GTP-bound type by a guanine nucleotide exchange factor (GEF) and promoted for hybridization to the GDP-bound type by a GTPase-activating protein (GAP). Previous studies showed that auxin efflux facilitators such as PIN1 are regulated by GNOM, an ARF-GEF, in Arabidopsis. In the November issue of The Plant Journal, we reported that the auxin influx facilitator AUX1 was regulated by ARF-GAP via the vesicle trafficking system.¹ In this addendum, we report that overexpression of OsAGAP leads to enhanced root gravitropism and propose a new model of PAT regulation: a loop mechanism between ARF-GAP and GEF mediated by vesicle trafficking to regulate PAT at influx and efflux facilitators, thus controlling root development in plants.Key Words: ADP-ribosylation factor (ARF), ARF-GAP, ARF-GEF, auxin, GNOM, polar transport of auxinPolar auxin transport (PAT) is a unique process in plants. It results in alteration of auxin level, which controls organogenesis and development and a series of physiological processes, such as vascular differentiation, apical dominance, and tropic growth.² Genetic and physiological studies identified that PAT depends on efflux facilitators such as PIN family proteins and influx facilitators such as AUX1 in Arabidopsis.Eight PIN family proteins, AtPIN1 to AtPIN8, exist in Arabidopsis. AtPIN1 is located at the basal side of the plasma membrane in vascular tissues but is weak in cortical tissues, which supports the hypothesis of chemical pervasion.³ AtPIN2 is localized at the apical side of epidermal cells and basally in cortical cells.^1,4 GNOM, an ARF GEF, modulates the localization of PIN1 and vesicle trafficking and affects root development.^5,6 The PIN auxin-efflux facilitator network controls root growth and patterning in Arabidopsis.⁴ As well, asymmetric localization of AUX1 occurs in the root cells of Arabidopsis plants,⁷ and overexpression of OsAGAP interferes with localization of AUX1.¹ Our data support that ARF-GAP mediates auxin influx and auxin-dependent root growth and patterning, which involves vesicle trafficking.¹ Here we show that OsAGAP overexpression leads to enhanced gravitropic response in transgenic rice plants. We propose a model whereby ARF GTPase is a molecular switch to control PAT and root growth and development.Overexpression of OsAGAP led to reduced growth in primary or adventitious roots of rice as compared with wild-type rice.¹ Gravitropism assay revealed transgenic rice overxpressing OsAGAP with a faster response to gravity than the wild type during 24-h treatment. However, 1-naphthyl acetic acid (NAA) treatment promoted the gravitropic response of the wild type, with no difference in response between the OsAGAP transgenic plants and the wild type plants (Fig. 1). The phenotype of enhanced gravitropic response in the transgenic plants was similar to that in the mutants atmdr1-100 and atmdr1-100/atpgp1-100 related to Arabidopsis ABC (ATP-binding cassette) transporter and defective in PAT.⁸ The physiological data, as well as data on localization of auxin transport facilitators, support ARF-GAP modulating PAT via regulating the location of the auxin influx facilitator AUX1.¹ So the alteration in gravitropic response in the OsAGAP transgenic plants was explained by a defect in PAT.Open in a separate windowFigure 1Gravitropism of OsAGAP overexpressing transgenic rice roots and response to 1-naphthyl acetic acid (NAA). (A) Gravitropism phenotype of wild type (WT) and OsAGAP overexpressing roots at 6 hr gravi-stimulation (top panel) and 0 hr as a treatment control (bottom panel). (B) Time course of gravitropic response in transgenic roots. (C and D) results correspond to those in (A and B), except for treatment with NAA (5 × 10⁻⁷ M).The polarity of auxin transport is controlled by the asymmetric distribution of auxin transport proteins, efflux facilitators and influx carriers. ARF GTPase is a key member in vesicle trafficking system and modulates cell polarity and PAT in plants. Thus, ARF-GDP or GTP bound with GEF or GAP determines the ARF function on auxin efflux facilitators (such as PIN1) or influx ones (such as AUX1).ARF1, targeting ROP2 and PIN2, affects epidermal cell polarity.⁹ GNOM is involved in the regulation of PIN1 asymmetric localization in cells and its related function in organogenesis and development.⁶ Although VAN3, an ARF-GAP in Arabidopsis, is located in a subpopulation of the trans-Golgi transport network (TGN), which is involved in leaf vascular network formation, it does not affect PAT.¹⁰ OsAGAP possesses an ARF GTPase-activating function in rice.¹¹ Specifically, our evidence supports that ARF-GAP bound with ARF-GTP modulates PAT and gravitropism via AUX1, mediated by vesicle trafficking, including the Golgi stack.¹Therefore, we propose a loop mechanism between ARF-GAP and GEF mediated by the vascular trafficking system in regulating PAT at influx and efflux facilitators, which controls root development and gravitropism in plants (Fig. 2). Here we emphasize that ARF-GEF catalyzes a conversion of ARF-bound GDP to GTP, which is necessary for the efficient delivery of the vesicle to the target membrane.¹² An opposite process of ARF-bound GDP to GTP is promoted by ARF-GTPase-activating protein via binding. A loop status of ARF-GTP and ARF-GDP bound with their appurtenances controls different auxin facilitators and regulates root development and gravitropism.Open in a separate windowFigure 2Model for ARF GTPase as a molecular switch for the polar auxin transport mediated by the vesicle traffic system.     

Strigolactones' ability to regulate root development may be executed by induction of the ethylene pathway

The newly defined phytohormones strigolactones (SLs) were recently shown to act as regulators of root development. Their positive effect on root-hair (RH) elongation enabled examination of their cross talk with auxin and ethylene. Analysis of wild-type plants and hormone-signaling mutants combined with hormonal treatments suggested that SLs and ethylene regulate RH elongation via a common regulatory pathway, in which ethylene is epistatic to SLs. The SL and auxin hormonal pathways were suggested to converge for regulation of RH elongation; this convergence was suggested to be mediated via the ethylene pathway, and to include regulation of auxin transport.Key words: strigolactone, auxin, ethylene, root, root hair, lateral rootStrigolactones (SLs) are newly identified phytohormones that act as long-distance shoot-branching inhibitors (reviewed in ref. ¹). In Arabidopsis, SLs have been shown to be regulators of root development and architecture, by modulating primary root elongation and lateral root formation.^2,3 In addition, they were shown to have a positive effect on root-hair (RH) elongation.² All of these effects are mediated via the MAX2 F-box.^2,3In addition to SLs, two other plant hormones, auxin and ethylene, have been shown to affect root development, including lateral root formation and RH elongation.^4–6 Since all three phytohormones (SLs, auxin and ethylene) were shown to have a positive effect on RH elongation, we examined the epistatic relations between them by examining RH length.⁷ Our results led to the conclusion that SLs and ethylene are in the same pathway regulating RH elongation, where ethylene may be epistatic to SLs.⁷ Moreover, auxin signaling was shown to be needed to some extent for the RH response to SLs: the auxin-insensitive mutant tir1-1,⁸ was less sensitive to SLs than the wild type under low SL concentrations.⁷On the one hand, ethylene has been shown to induce the auxin response,^9–12 auxin synthesis in the root apex,^11,12 and acropetal and basipetal auxin transport in the root.^4,13 On the other, ethylene has been shown to be epistatic to SLs in the SL-induced RH-elongation response.⁷ Therefore, it might be that at least for RH elongation, SLs are in direct cross talk with ethylene, whereas the cross talk between SL and auxin pathways may converge through that of ethylene.⁷ The reduced response to SLs in tir1-1 may be derived from its reduced ethylene sensitivity;^7,14 this is in line with the notion of the ethylene pathway being a mediator in the cross talk between the SL and auxin pathways.The suggested ethylene-mediated convergence of auxin and SLs may be extended also to lateral root formation, and may involve regulation of auxin transport. In the root, SLs have been suggested to affect auxin efflux,^3,15 whereas ethylene has been shown to have a positive effect on auxin transport.^4,13 Hence, it might be that in the root, the SLs'' effect on auxin flux is mediated, at least in part, via the ethylene pathway. Ethylene''s ability to increase auxin transport in roots was associated with its negative effect on lateral root formation: ethylene was suggested to enhance polar IAA transport, leading to alterations in the quantity of auxin that unloads into the tissues to drive lateral root formation.⁴ Under conditions of sufficient phosphate, SL''s effect was similar to that of ethylene: SLs reduced the appearance of lateral roots; this was explained by their ability to change auxin flux.³ Taken together, one possibility is that the SLs'' ability to affect auxin flux and thereby lateral root formation in the roots is mediated by induction of ethylene synthesis.To conclude, root development may be regulated by a network of auxin, SL and ethylene cross talk.⁷ The possibility that similar networks exist elsewhere in the SLs'' regulation of plant development, including shoot architecture, cannot be excluded.     

Silicon efflux transporters isolated from two pumpkin cultivars contrasting in Si uptake

The accumulation of silicon (Si) differs greatly with plant species and cultivars due to different ability of the roots to take up Si. In Si accumulating plants such as rice, barley and maize, Si uptake is mediated by the influx (Lsi1) and efflux (Lsi2) transporters. Here we report isolation and functional analysis of two Si efflux transporters (CmLsi2-1 and CmLsi2-2) from two pumpkin (Cucurbita moschata Duch.) cultivars contrasting in Si uptake. These cultivars are used for rootstocks of bloom and bloomless cucumber, respectively. Different from mutations in the Si influx transporter CmLsi1, there was no difference in the sequence of either CmLsi2 between two cultivars. Both CmLsi2-1 and CmLsi2-2 showed an efflux transport activity for Si and they were expressed in both the roots and shoots. These results confirm our previous finding that mutation in CmLsi1, but not in CmLsi2-1 and CmLsi2-2 are responsible for bloomless phenotype resulting from low Si uptake.Key words: silicon, efflux transporter, pumpkin, cucumber, bloomSilicon (Si) is the second most abundant elements in earth''s crust.¹ Therefore, all plants rooting in soils contain Si in their tissues. However Si accumulation in the shoot differs greatly among plant species, ranging for 0.1 to 10% of dry weight.^1–3 In higher plants, only Poaceae, Equisetaceae and Cyperaceae show a high Si accumulation.^2,3 Si accumulation also differs with cultivars within a species.^4,5 These differences in Si accumulation have been attributed to the ability of the roots to take up Si.^6,7Genotypic difference in Si accumulation has been used to produce bloomless cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.).⁸ Bloom (white and fine powders) on the surface of cucumber fruits is primarily composed of silica (SiO₂).⁹ However, nowadays, cucumber without bloom (bloomless cucumber) is more popular in Japan due to its more attractive and distinctly shiny appearance. Bloomless cucumber is produced by grafting cucumber on some specific pumpkin (Cucurbita moschata Duch.) cultivars. These pumpkin cultivars used for bloomless cucumber rootstocks have lower silicon accumulation compared with the rootstocks used for producing bloom cucumber.⁹Our study showed that the difference in Si accumulation between bloom and bloomless root stocks of pumpkin cultivars results from different Si uptake by the roots.¹⁰ Si uptake has been demonstrated to be mediated by two different types of transporters (Lsi1 and Lsi2) in rice, barley and maize.^11–15 Lsi1 is an influx transporter of Si, belonging to a NIP subfamily of aquaporin family.^10,11,13,14 This transporter is responsible for transport of Si from external solution to the root cells.¹¹ On the other hand, Lsi2 is an efflux transporter of Si, belonging to putative anion transporter.¹² Lsi2 releases Si from the root cells towards the xylem. Both Lsi1 and Lsi2 are required for Si uptake by the roots.^11,12 To understand the mechanism underlying genotypic difference in Si uptake, we have isolated and functionally characterized an influx Si transporter CmLsi1 from two pumpkin cultivars used for rootstocks of bloomless and bloom cucumber.¹⁰ Sequence analysis showed only two amino acids difference of CmLsi1 between two pumpkin cultivars. However, CmLsi1 from bloom rootstock [CmLsi1(B⁺)] showed transport activity for Si, whereas that from bloomless rootstock [CmLsi1(B⁻)] did not.¹⁰ Furthermore, we found that loss of Si transport activity was caused by one amino acid mutation at the position of 242 (from proline to leucine).¹⁰ This mutation resulted in failure to be localized at the plasma membrane, which is necessary for functioning as an influx transporter. The mutated protein was localized at the ER.¹⁰ Here, we report isolation and expression analysis of Si efflux transporters from two pumpkin cultivars contrasting in Si uptake and accumulation to examine whether Si efflux transporter is also involved in the bloom and bloomless phenotypes.     

Piriformospora indica mycorrhization increases grain yield by accelerating early development of barley plants

Root colonization by the basidiomycete fungus Piriformospora indica induces host plant tolerance against abiotic and biotic stress, and enhances growth and yield. As P. indica has a broad host range, it has been established as a model system to study beneficial plant-microbe interactions. Moreover, its properties led to the assumption that P. indica shows potential for application in crop plant production. Therefore, possible mechanisms of P. indica improving host plant yield were tested in outdoor experiments: Induction of higher grain yield in barley was independent of elevated pathogen levels and independent of different phosphate fertilization levels. In contrast to the arbuscular mycorrhiza fungus Glomus mosseae total phosphate contents of host plant roots and shoots were not significantly affected by P. indica. Analysis of plant development and yield parameters indicated that positive effects of P. indica on grain yield are due to accelerated growth of barley plants early in development.Key words: mycorrhiza, barley development, Piriformospora indica, phosphate uptake, grain yield, pathogen resistanceThe wide majority of plant roots in natural ecosystems is associated with fungi, which very often play an important role for the host plants'' fitness.¹ The widespread arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) symbiosis formed by fungi of the phylum Glomeromycota is mainly characterized by providing phosphate to their host plant in exchange for carbohydrates.^2,3 Fungi of the order Sebacinales also form beneficial interactions with plant roots and Piriformospora indica is the best-studied example of this group.⁴ This endophyte was originally identified in the rhizosphere of shrubs in the Indian Thar desert,⁵ but it turned out that the fungus colonizes roots of a very broad range of mono- and dicotyledonous plants,⁶ including major crop plants.^7–9 Like other mutualistic endophytes, P. indica colonizes roots in an asymptomatic manner¹⁰ and promotes growth in several tested plant species.^6,11,12 The root endophyte, moreover, enhances yield in barley and tomato and increases in both plants resistance against biotic stresses,^7,9 suggesting that application in agri- and horticulture could be successful.     

Cell Migration from Baby to Mother

Fetal cells migrate into the mother during pregnancy. Fetomaternal transfer probably occurs in all pregnancies and in humans the fetal cells can persist for decades. Microchimeric fetal cells are found in various maternal tissues and organs including blood, bone marrow, skin and liver. In mice, fetal cells have also been found in the brain. The fetal cells also appear to target sites of injury. Fetomaternal microchimerism may have important implications for the immune status of women, influencing autoimmunity and tolerance to transplants. Further understanding of the ability of fetal cells to cross both the placental and blood-brain barriers, to migrate into diverse tissues, and to differentiate into multiple cell types may also advance strategies for intravenous transplantation of stem cells for cytotherapeutic repair. Here we discuss hypotheses for how fetal cells cross the placental and blood-brain barriers and the persistence and distribution of fetal cells in the mother.Key Words: fetomaternal microchimerism, stem cells, progenitor cells, placental barrier, blood-brain barrier, adhesion, migrationMicrochimerism is the presence of a small population of genetically distinct and separately derived cells within an individual. This commonly occurs following transfusion or transplantation.^1–3 Microchimerism can also occur between mother and fetus. Small numbers of cells traffic across the placenta during pregnancy. This exchange occurs both from the fetus to the mother (fetomaternal)^4–7 and from the mother to the fetus.^8–10 Similar exchange may also occur between monochorionic twins in utero.^11–13 There is increasing evidence that fetomaternal microchimerism persists lifelong in many child-bearing women.^7,14 The significance of fetomaternal microchimerism remains unclear. It could be that fetomaternal microchimerism is an epiphenomenon of pregnancy. Alternatively, it could be a mechanism by which the fetus ensures maternal fitness in order to enhance its own chances of survival. In either case, the occurrence of pregnancy-acquired microchimerism in women may have implications for graft survival and autoimmunity. More detailed understanding of the biology of microchimeric fetal cells may also advance progress towards cytotherapeutic repair via intravenous transplantation of stem or progenitor cells.Trophoblasts were the first zygote-derived cell type found to cross into the mother. In 1893, Schmorl reported the appearance of trophoblasts in the maternal pulmonary vasculature.¹⁵ Later, trophoblasts were also observed in the maternal circulation.^16–20 Subsequently various other fetal cell types derived from fetal blood were also found in the maternal circulation.^21,22 These fetal cell types included lymphocytes,²³ erythroblasts or nucleated red blood cells,^24,25 haematopoietic progenitors^7,26,27 and putative mesenchymal progenitors.^14,28 While it has been suggested that small numbers of fetal cells traffic across the placenta in every human pregnancy,^29–31 trophoblast release does not appear to occur in all pregnancies.³² Likewise, in mice, fetal cells have also been reported in maternal blood.^33,34 In the mouse, fetomaternal transfer also appears to occur during all pregnancies.³⁵     

Development of casparian strip in rice cultivars

The development of Casparian strips (CSs) on the endo- and exodermis and their chemical components in roots of three cultivars of rice (Oryza sativa) with different salt tolerance were compared using histochemistry and Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy. The development and deposition of suberin lamellae of CSs on the endo- and exodermis in the salt-tolerant cultivar Liaohan 109 was earlier than in the moderately tolerant cultivar Tianfeng 202 and the sensitive cultivar Nipponbare. The detection of chemical components indicated major contributions to the structure of the outer part from aliphatic suberin, lignin and cell wall proteins and carbohydrates to the rhizodermis, exodermis, sclerenchyma and one layer of cortical cells in series (OPR) and the endodermal Casparian strip. Moreover, the amounts of these major chemical components in the outer part of the Liaohan 109 root were higher than in Tianfeng 202 and Nipponbare, but there was no distinct difference in endodermal CSs among the three rice cultivars. The results suggest that the exodermis of the salt-tolerant cultivar Liaohan 109 functions as a barrier for resisting salt stress.Key words: casparian strip, chemical components, development, rice, rootPlant roots are in direct contact with the soil environment and thus particularly affected by unfavorable conditions. To withstand the surrounding environment, roots have developed anatomical and physiological adaptations. The development of Casparian strips (CSs) in the root endo- and exodermis is one such strategy.^1–3 In roots of most species, the sequence of development of the endo- and exodermis is roughly the same and involves two consecutive developmental stages: (1) formation of CSs in radial and transverse walls impregnating the primary cell wall pores with lipophilic and aromatic substances and (2) deposition of suberin lamellae to the inner surface of anticlinal and tangential cell walls.^4–6A major function of the CS is to block the non-selective apoplastic bypass flow of water and ions into the stele.³ Therefore, the structure,^7–9 chemical nature,^10–12 and physiological function^13,14 of endo- and exdodermal CSs in roots have been the focus of many investigations. Although oxygen loss, drought and salinity can influence the development and chemical nature of CSs in different rice cultivars,^15–19 few investigations have considered the development and formation of endo- and exdodermal CSs in the roots of rice cultivars with different salt tolerance under normal growing conditions.In the present paper, light microscopy and Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy were used to examine the cytochemistry and root anatomy of isolated CSs. The aim was to compare anatomical development and chemical characteristics of the endoand exdodermal CSs of three rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivars having different salt tolerance in north China: the salt-tolerant Liaohan 109 and two widely grown cultivars, Tianfeng 202 and Nipponbare.     

Strigolactones as mediators of plant growth responses to environmental conditions

Strigolactones (SLs) have been recently identified as a new group of plant hormones or their derivatives thereof, shown to play a role in plant development. Evolutionary forces have driven the development of mechanisms in plants that allow adaptive adjustments to a variety of different habitats by employing plasticity in shoot and root growth and development. The ability of SLs to regulate both shoot and root development suggests a role in the plant''s response to its growth environment. To play this role, SL pathways need to be responsive to plant growth conditions, and affect plant growth toward increased adaptive adjustment. Here, the effects of SLs on shoot and root development are presented, and possible feedback loops between SLs and two environmental cues, light and nutrient status, are discussed; these might suggest a role for SLs in plants'' adaptive adjustment to growth conditions.Key words: strigolactones, light, nutrient status, root, shoot, branching, lateral roots, root hairsStrigolactones (SLs) are carotenoid-derived terpenoid lactones suggested to stem from the carotenoid pathway¹ via the activity of various oxygenases.^2,3 SLs production has been demonstrated in both monocotyledons and eudicotyledons (reviewed in ref. ⁴), suggesting their presence in many plant species.⁵ SLs are synthesized mainly in the roots and in some parts of the stem and then move towards the shoot apex (reviewed ref. ⁷).^6,8,9SLs were first characterized more than 40 years ago as germination stimulants of the parasitic plants Striga and Orobanche and later, as stimulants of arbuscular mycorrhiza hyphal branching as well (reviewed in ref. ^{4, 10–13}). Recently, SLs or derivatives thereof, have been identified as a new group of plant hormones, shown to play a role in inhibition of shoot branching,^2,3,8,9 thereby affecting shoot architecture; more recently they have also been shown to affect root growth by affecting auxin efflux.¹⁴Plants have developed mechanisms that allow adaptive adjustments to a variety of different habitats by employing plasticity in their growth and development.¹⁵ Shoot architecture is affected by environmental cues, such as light quality and quantity and nutrient status.^16–19 Root-system architecture and development are affected by environmental conditions such as nutrient availability (reviewed in ref. ^{20, 21}). At the same time, plant hormones are known to be involved in the regulation of plant growth, development and architecture (reviewed in ref. ^22–24) and to be mediators of the effects of environmental cues on plant development; one classic example is auxin''s role in the plant''s shade-avoidance response (reviewed in ref. ²⁵).The ability of SLs to regulate shoot and root development suggests that these phytohormones also have a role in the plant''s growth response to its environment. To play this putative role, SL pathways need to be responsive to plant growth conditions, and affect plant growth toward enhancing its adaptive adjustment. The present review examines the SLs'' possible role in adaptive adjustment of the plant''s response to growth conditions, by discussing their effect on plant development and the possible associations and feedback loops between SLs and two environmental cues: light and nutrient status.     

Loss of LORELEI function in the pistil delays initiation but does not affect embryo development in Arabidopsis thaliana

Double fertilization, uniquely observed in plants, requires successful sperm cell delivery by the pollen tube to the female gametophyte, followed by migration, recognition and fusion of the two sperm cells with two female gametic cells. The female gametophyte not only regulates these steps but also controls the subsequent initiation of seed development. Previously, we reported that loss of LORELEI, which encodes a putative glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI)-anchored protein, in the female reproductive tissues causes a delay in initiation of seed development. From these studies, however, it was unclear if embryos derived from fertilization of lre-5 gametophytes continued to lag behind wild-type during seed development. Additionally, it was not determined if the delay in initiation of seed development had any lingering effects during seed germination. Finally, it was not known if loss of LORELEI function affects seedling development given that LORELEI is expressed in eight-day-old seedlings. Here, we showed that despite a delay in initiation, lre-5/lre-5 embryos recover, becoming equivalent to the developing wild-type embryos beginning at 72 hours after pollination. Additionally, lre-5/lre-5 seed germination, and seedling and root development are indistinguishable from wild-type indicating that loss of LORELEI is tolerated, at least under standard growth conditions, in vegetative tissues.Key words: LORELEI, glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI)-anchored protein, embryogenesis, DD45, seed germination, primary and lateral root growth, seedling developmentDouble fertilization is unique to flowering plants. Upon female gametophyte reception of a pollen tube, the egg and central cells of the female gametophyte fuse with the two released sperm cells to form zygote and endosperm, respectively and initiate seed development.¹ The female gametophyte controls seed development by (1) repressing premature central cell or egg cell proliferation until double fertilization is completed,^1–3 (2) supplying factors that mediate early stages of embryo and endosperm development^1,4,5 and (3) regulating imprinting of genes required for seed development.^1,6The molecular mechanisms underlying female gametophyte control of early seed development are poorly understood. Although much progress has been made in identifying genes and mechanisms by which the female gametophyte represses premature central cell or egg cell proliferation until double fertilization is completed and regulates imprinting of genes required for seed development,^1,6 only a handful of female gametophyte-expressed genes that affect early embryo^7,8 and endosperm⁹ development after fertilization have been characterized. This is particularly important given that a large number of female gametophyte-expressed genes likely regulate early seed development.⁵We recently reported on a mutant screen for plants with reduced fertility and identification of a mutant that contained a large number of undeveloped ovules and very few viable seeds.¹⁰ TAIL-PCR revealed that this mutant is a new allele of LORELEI(LRE) [At4g26466].^10,11 Four lre alleles have been reported;¹¹ so, this mutant was designated lre-5.¹⁰ The Arabidopsis LORELEI protein contains 165 amino acids and possesses sequence features indicative of a glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI)-anchor containing cell surface protein. GPI-anchors serve as an alternative to transmembrane domains for anchoring proteins in cell membranes and GPI-anchored proteins participate in many functions including cell-cell signaling.¹²     

Strigolactones: Internal and external signals in plant symbioses?

As the newest plant hormone, strigolactone research is undergoing an exciting expansion. In less than five years, roles for strigolactones have been defined in shoot branching, secondary growth, root growth and nodulation, to add to the growing understanding of their role in arbuscular mycorrhizae and parasitic weed interactions.¹ Strigolactones are particularly fascinating as signaling molecules as they can act both inside the plant as an endogenous hormone and in the soil as a rhizosphere signal.^2-4 Our recent research has highlighted such a dual role for strigolactones, potentially acting as both an endogenous and exogenous signal for arbuscular mycorrhizal development.⁵ There is also significant interest in examining strigolactones as putative regulators of responses to environmental stimuli, especially the response to nutrient availability, given the strong regulation of strigolactone production by nitrate and phosphate observed in many species.^5,6 In particular, the potential for strigolactones to mediate the ecologically important response of mycorrhizal colonization to phosphate has been widely discussed. However, using a mutant approach we found that strigolactones are not essential for phosphate regulation of mycorrhizal colonization or nodulation.⁵ This is consistent with the relatively mild impairment of phosphate control of seedling root growth observed in Arabidopsis strigolactone mutants.⁷ This contrasts with the major role for strigolactones in phosphate control of shoot branching of rice and Arabidopsis^8,9 and indicates that the integration of strigolactones into our understanding of nutrient response will be complex. New data presented here, along with the recent discovery of phosphate specific CLE peptides,¹⁰ indicates a potential role for PsNARK, a component of the autoregulation of nodulation pathway, in phosphate control of nodulation.     

Protein interactors of acyl-CoA-binding protein ACBP2 mediate cadmium tolerance in Arabidopsis

In our recent paper in the Plant Journal, we reported that Arabidopsis thaliana lysophospholipase 2 (lysoPL2) binds acyl-CoA-binding protein 2 (ACBP2) to mediate cadmium [Cd(II)] tolerance in transgenic Arabidopsis. ACBP2 contains ankyrin repeats that have been previously shown to mediate protein-protein interactions with an ethylene-responsive element binding protein (AtEBP) and a farnesylated protein 6 (AtFP6). Transgenic Arabidopsis ACBP2-overexpressors, lysoPL2-overexpressors and AtFP6-overexpressors all display enhanced Cd(II) tolerance, in comparison to wild type, suggesting that ACBP2 and its protein partners work together to mediate Cd(II) tolerance. Given that recombinant ACBP2 and AtFP6 can independently bind Cd(II) in vitro, they may be able to participate in Cd(II) translocation. The binding of recombinant ACBP2 to [¹⁴C]linoleoyl-CoA and [¹⁴C]linolenoyl-CoA implies its role in phospholipid repair. In conclusion, ACBP2 can mediate tolerance to Cd(II)-induced oxidative stress by interacting with two protein partners, AtFP6 and lysoPL2. Observations that ACBP2 also binds lysophosphatidylcholine (lysoPC) in vitro and that recombinant lysoPL2 degrades lysoPC, further confirm an interactive role for ACBP2 and lysoPL2 in overcoming Cd(II)-induced stress.Key words: acyl-CoA-binding protein, cadmium, hydrogen peroxide, lysophospholipase, oxidative stressAcyl-CoA-binding proteins (ACBP1 to ACBP6) are encoded by a multigene family in Arabidopsis thaliana.¹ These ACBP proteins are well studied in Arabidopsis in comparison to other organisms,^1–4 and are located in various subcellular compartments.¹ Plasma membranelocalized ACBP1 and ACBP2 contain ankyrin repeats that have been shown to function in protein-protein interactions.^5,6 ACBP1 and ACBP2 which share 76.9% amino acid identity also confer tolerance in transgenic Arabidopsis to lead [Pb(II)] and Cd(II), respectively.^1,5,7 Since recombinant ACBP1 and ACBP2 bind linolenoyl-CoA and linoleoyl-CoA in vitro, they may possibly be involved in phospholipid repair in response to heavy metal stress at the plasma membrane.^5,7 In contrast, ACBP3 is an extracellularly-localized protein⁸ while ACBP4, ACBP5 and ACBP6 are localized to cytosol.^9,10 ACBP1 and ACBP6 have recently been shown to be involved in freezing stress.^9,11 ACBP4 and ACBP5 bind oleoyl-CoA ester and their mRNA expressions are lightregulated.^12,13 Besides acyl-CoA esters, some ACBPs also bind phospholipids.^9,11,13 To investigate the biological function of ACBP2, we have proceeded to establish its interactors at the ankyrin repeats, including AtFP6,⁵ AtEBP⁶ and now lysoPL2 in the Plant Journal paper. While the significance in the interaction of ACBP2 with AtEBP awaits further investigations, some parallels can be drawn between those of ACBP2 with AtFP6 and with lysoPL2.     

New insights into the signaling pathways controlling defense gene expression in rice roots during the arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis

Mycorrhizal fungi form a mutualistic relationship with the roots of most plant species. This association provides the arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungus with sugars while the fungus improves the uptake of water and mineral nutrients in the host plant. Moreover, the induction of defense gene expression in mycorrhizal roots has been described. While salicylic acid (SA)-regulated Pathogenesis-Related (PR) proteins accumulate in rice roots colonized by the AM fungus G. intraradices , the SA content is not significantly altered in the mycorrhizal roots. Sugars, in addition to being a source of carbon for the fungus, might act as signals for the control of defense gene expression. We hypothesize that increased demands for sugars by the fungus might be responsible for the activation of the host defense responses which will then contribute to the stabilization of root colonization by the AM fungus. An excessive root colonization might change a mutualistic association into a parasitic association.Key words: Glomus intraradices, glucose, fructose, Oryza sativa, pathogenesis-related (PR), salicylic acid (SA), sucrose, sugarsThe arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi are obligate biotrophs that establish mutualistic associations with the roots of over 90% of all plant species. AM fungi improve the uptake of water and mineral nutrients in the host plant, mainly phosphorus and nitrogen, in exchange for sugars generated from photosynthesis. The benefits of the AM symbiosis on plant fitness are largely known, including increased ability to cope with biotic and abiotic stresses.^1,2 In fact, the amount of carbon allocated to mycorrhizal roots might be up 20% of the total photosynthate income.³ During root colonization, the AM fungus penetrates into the root through the epidermal cells and colonizes the cortex. In the root cortical cells, the fungus forms highly branched structures, called arbuscules, which are the site of the major nutrient exchange between the two symbionts.^4,5 The legumes Medicago truncatula and Lotus japonicus have been widely adopted as the reference species for studies of the AM symbiosis. Cereal crops and rice in particular are also able to establish symbiotic associations with AM fungi.^6,7 Arabidopsis thaliana, the model system for functional genomics in plants, has no mycorrhization ability.It is also well known that plants have evolved inducible defense systems to protect themselves from pathogen invasion. Challenge with a pathogen activates a complex variety of defense reactions that includes the rapid generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), changes in ion fluxes across the plasma membrane, cell wall reinforcement and production of antimicrobial compounds (e.g., phytoalexins).⁸ One of the most frequently observed biochemical events following pathogen infection is the accumulation of pathogenesis-related (PR) proteins.⁹ For some PR proteins antimicrobial activities have been described (e.g., chitinases, β-1,3-glucanases, thionins or defensins). The plant responses to pathogen attack are activated both locally and systemically. The phytohormones salicyclic acid (SA), jasmonic acid (JA), ethylene (ET) and abscisic acid (ABA) act as defense signaling molecules for the activation of defense responses.¹⁰ Whereas SA-dependent signaling often provides resistance to biotrophic pathogens, JA/ET-dependent signaling is effective against necrotrophic pathogens.¹¹ During plant-pathogen interactions, cross-talk between SA and JA/ET signaling pathways provides the plant with the opportunity to prioritize one pathway over another to efficiently fine-tune its defense response to the invading pathogen. Contrary to biotrophic pathogens which exhibit a high degree of host specificity, the AM fungi manage to colonize a broad range of plant species.Evidence also exists on the existence of common mechanisms and signaling pathways governing responses to AM and pathogenic fungi.^2,12,13 Alterations in the content of hormones acting as defense signals also appear to occur during the AM symbiosis. As an example, JA and its derivatives (jasmonates) are believed to play an important role during the AM symbiosis in M. truncatula or tomato plants.^14,15 However, controversial data exists in the literature concerning the involvement of the various defense-related hormones during AM functioning. In particular, our current understanding of SA signaling during AM symbiosis is not clear.We recently documented the symbiotic proteome of the rice roots during their interaction with the AM fungus Glomus intraradices.⁶ A majority of the proteins identified in the rice symbiotic proteome are proteins with a function in defense responses or sugar metabolism. Among the proteins that accumulated at high levels in mycorrhizal rice roots compared to non mycorrhizal roots were PR proteins belonging to different PR families, such as PR1, chitinases (PR3), PR5 and several PR10 proteins. The PR1 and PBZ1 (a member of the PR10 family of PR proteins) genes are considered markers of the activation of defense responses in rice plants.^16,17 Of interest, the expression of many of the AM-regulated PR genes was previously reported to be induced by SA.^16,18–20 Proteins acting as oxidative stress protectors, such as ascorbate peroxidases, peroxidases and glutathione-S-transferases, also accumulated in mycorrhizal rice roots. Together, these observations support that the plant''s immune system is activated in the mycorrhizal rice root.To gain further insights into the molecular mechanisms governing PR gene expression in mycorrhizal roots, the SA and sugar contents of mycorrhizal roots were determined. Towards this end, rice (Oryza sativa ssp. japonica cv. Senia) plants were inoculated with the AM fungus G. intraradices.⁶ At 42 days post-inoculation (dpi), the overall colonization of the rice roots ranged from 25 to 30% as judged by microscopical observations of trypan blue-stained roots (results not shown; similar results were reported previously in reference ⁶). By this time, all the events related to fungal development, namely intraradical hyphae, arbuscules at different morphological stages of formation and vesicles, were present in G. intraradices-inoculated roots, thus confirming the establishment of the symbiotic association in the rice roots.Knowing that many AM-regulated proteins are also regulated by SA in rice roots, it was of interest to determine whether the level of endogenous SA increases in mycorrhizal roots compared to non mycorrhizal roots. In plants, intracellular SA is found predominantly as free SA and its sugar conjugate SA-glucoside (SAG). Root samples were analyzed for SA content, by measuring the level of both free SA and SAG as previously described in reference ²¹. This analysis revealed no significant differences, neither in free nor in SAG, between mycorrhizal and non mycorrhizal roots (Fig. 1). Then, it appears that although the expression of PR genes (functioning in a SA-dependent manner) is activated during the AM symbiosis, the fungus G. intraradices do not exploit the SA-mediated signaling pathway for induction of PR genes.Open in a separate windowFigure 1SA content, free SA and SA-glucoside (SAG) conjugate, in roots of mock-inoculated (−Gi) and G. intraradices-inoculated (+Gi) rice plants. SA determination was carried out at 42 days post-inoculation with G. intraradices. Three independent biological samples and three replicates per biological sample were used for quantification of SA. Two out of the three samples were the same ones used for the characterization of the symbiotic proteome in which the accumulation of SA-regulated PR genes was observed in reference ⁶. FW, fresh weight. Bars represent the means ± standard error.On the other hand, a direct link between sugar metabolism and the plant defense response has been established, including the phenomenon of high sugarmediated resistance and the finding that various key PR genes are induced by sugars. Transgenic approaches that lead to alterations in photoassimilate partitioning, either sucrose or hexoses, also alter PR gene expression.^22,23 In other studies, a SA-independent induction of PR genes by soluble sugars, sucrose, glucose and fructose, was reported in reference ²⁴.Sucrose, the main form of assimilated carbon during photosynthesis, is transported to the root tissues via the phloem where it becomes available to the root cells. As previously mentioned, characterization of the rice symbiotic proteome revealed alterations in the accumulation of proteins involved in sugar metabolism, such as enzymes involved in glucolysis/gluconeogenesis (e.g., fructose-1,6-bisphophate aldolase, enolase) or in pentose interconversions (e.g., UDP-glucose dehydrogenase).⁶ Because the plant provides sugars to the fungus, it is not surprising to find alterations in enzymes involved in sugar metabolism in the mycorrhizal roots. Evidence also supports that AM fungi acquire hexoses from the host cell and transform it into trehalose and glycogen, the typical sugars in the fungus.²⁵ Utilization of sucrose then requires hydrolysis in the plant cell which can be performed by sucrose synthase, producing UDP-glucose and fructose or invertases, producing glucose and fructose. Along with this, increased activities of invertases and sucrose synthases or increased expression of their corresponding genes, have been described during AM symbiotic interactions.^26,27 Very recently, the MtSucS1 sucrose synthase gene was reported to be essential for the establishment and maintenance of the AM symbiosis in Medicago truncatula.²⁸ In this context, we decided to explore whether colonization by G. intraradices has an effect on the accumulation of soluble sugars in rice roots.Sucrose, glucose and fructose content were measured enzymatically²³ in the rice roots at 42 days post-inoculation with G. intraradices . A tendency to a higher sucrose level was observed in mycorrhizal roots compared to non-mycorrhizal roots (Fig. 2). Concerning the hexose content, the mycorrhizal roots had a significantly lower hexose, both glucose and fructose levels, compared to non-mycorrhizal roots (p ≤ 0.05, Fig. 2). This finding is in agreement with results reported by other authors indicating that the fungal symbiont takes up and uses hexoses within the root.^29,30 The observation that the sucrose content is not significantly affected by mycorrhiza functioning, indicates that the host cell is able to sense sucrose concentration in order to maintain it at sufficient but constant levels to satisfy the demand for sugars by the fungal symbiont.Open in a separate windowFigure 2Sugar content in roots of rice plants inoculated with G. intraradices (+Gi) or mock-inoculated (−Gi). (A) Sucrose content. (B) Glucose content. (C) Fructose content. Measurements were made at 42 days post-inoculation with G. intraradices. Bars represent the means ± standard error.Clearly, the outcome of the AM symbiosis is an overall improvement of the fitness of both partners: the plant supplies the fungus with photosynthates whereas the fungus delivers nutrients from the soil to the host plant. Variations in the extent of colonization of the AM fungi will impose different carbon demands on the plants. However, a high demand of photosynthates by the mycorrhizal root might result in increased mycorrhization which, in turn, might be detrimental for the host plant. The rate of colonization and the amount of fungal biomass must then be tightly controlled by the host plant. We postulate that an increased sink strength by AM colonization might result in transient and/or localized increases in sugar concentrations in the root cell which might be the signal for the activation of defense gene expression. A schematic representation of plant responses associated with increased demands for sugars and deployment of defense responses is shown in Figure 3. According to this model, sugars might play a dual role during the AM symbiosis: (1) sugars are transferred from the plant to the fungus in exchange of mineral nutrients and (2) sugars alter host gene expression, leading to the activation of defense-related genes. This will allow the host plant to avoid an excessive root colonization by the AM fungus that might cause negative effects on the plant''s fitness. A complex exchange and interplay of signals between plant roots and AM fungi must then operate during functioning of the AM symbiosis for coordination of joint nutrient resource explotation strategies and control of the plant''s immune system. During evolution, co-adaptation between the two symbionts, the AM fungi and the host plant, must have occurred for stabilization of mycorrhizal cooperation and optimal functioning of mycorrhizal associations along the mutualism-parasitism continuum.Open in a separate windowFigure 3Proposed model for a sugar mediated-activation of defense-related genes in mycorrhizal roots. In the arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis, the fungal symbiont colonizes root cortical cells, where it establishes differentiated hyphae called arbuscules. Arbuscules are the site of mineral nutrient transfer to the plant and the site of carbon acquisition by the fungus. Although arbuscules form within the root cortical cells, they remain separated from the plant cell cytoplasm by a plant-derived membrane, the periarbuscular membrane. In this way, an interface is created between the plant and fungal cells which appears to be optimal for nutrient transfer. Sucrose is transported through the phloem into the root. In the root cell, sucrose is hydrolyzed by host invertase and sucrose synthase activities before uptake by the AM fungus. Hexose uptake at the plant-fungus interfase might be passive with a concentration gradient maintained by rapid conversion of hexoses taken up by the fungus to trehalose and glycogen. Active mechanisms might also operate for hexose transport processes between the host cell and the symbiont. Under conditions of a high demand for sugars by the AM fungus, transient increases in sugar content will occur in the root cells which would be the signal for the activation of the host defense responses. The host-produced defense compounds would stabilize the level of root colonization by the AM fungus. An excessive root colonization might change the mutualistic association into a parasitic one.     

Anticipating future conditions via trajectory sensitivity

Plants are known to be highly responsive to environmental heterogeneity and normally allocate more biomass to organs that grow in richer patches. However, recent evidence demonstrates that plants can discriminately allocate more resources to roots that develop in patches with increasing nutrient levels, even when their other roots develop in richer patches. Responsiveness to the direction and steepness of spatial and temporal trajectories of environmental variables might enable plants to increase their performance by improving their readiness to anticipated resource availabilities in their immediate proximity. Exploring the ecological implications and mechanisms of trajectory-sensitivity in plants is expected to shed new light on the ways plants learn their environment and anticipate its future challenges and opportunities.Key words: Gradient perception, phenotypic plasticity, anticipatory responses, plant behavior, plant learningNatural environments present organisms with myriad challenges of surviving and reproducing under changing conditions.¹ Depending on its extent, predictability and costs, environmental heterogeneity may select for various combinations of genetic differentiation and phenotypic plasticity.^2–6 However, phenotypic plasticity is both limited and costly.⁷ One of the main limitations of phenotypic plasticity is the lag between the perception of the environment and the time the products of the plastic responses are fully operational.⁷ For instance, the developmental time of leaves may significantly limit the adaptive value of their plastic modification due to mismatches between the radiation levels and temperatures prevailing during their development and when mature and fully functional.^8,9 Accordingly, selection is expected to promote responsiveness to cues that bear information regarding the probable future environment.^9,10Indeed, anticipatory responses are highly prevalent, if not universal, amongst living organisms. Whether through intricate cerebral processes, such as in vertebrates, nervous coordination, as in Echinoderms,¹¹ or by relatively rudimentary non-neural processes, such as in plants¹² and bacteria,¹³ accumulating examples suggest that virtually all known life forms are able to not only sense and plastically respond to their immediate environment but also anticipate probable future conditions via environmental correlations.¹⁰Perhaps the best known example of plants'' ability to anticipate future conditions is their responsiveness to spectral red/far-red cues, which is commonly tightly correlated with future probability of light competition.¹⁴ Among others, plants have been shown to respond to cues related to anticipated herbivory^15,16 and nitrogen availability.¹⁷ Imminent stress is commonly anticipated by the perception of a prevailing stress. For example, adaptation to anticipated severe stress was demonstrated to be inducted by early priming by sub-acute drought,¹⁸ root competition¹⁹ and salinity.²⁰Future conditions can also be anticipated by gradient perception: because resource and stress levels are often changing along predictable spatial and temporal trajectories, spatio-temporal dynamics of environmental variables might convey information regarding anticipated growth conditions (Fig. 1). For example, the order of changes in day length, rather than day length itself, are known to assist plants in differentiating fall from spring and thus avoid blooming in the wrong season.²¹ In addition, responsiveness to environmental gradients as such, i.e., sensitivity to the direction and steepness of environmental trajectories, independently from the stationary levels of the same factors, has been demonstrated in higher organisms, such as the perception of acceleration in contrast to velocity;²² and the dynamics of skin temperature in contrast to stationary skin temperature;²³ where the adaptive value of the second-order derivatives of environmental factors is paramount. Similar perception capabilities have also been demonstrated in rudimentary life forms such as bacteria (reviewed in refs. ¹³ and ²⁴) and plants.^25,26 Specifically, perception of environmental trajectories might assist organisms to both anticipate future conditions and better utilize the more promising patches in their immediate environment.^27,28Open in a separate windowFigure 1Trajectory sensitivity in plants. The hypothetical curves depict examples of spatio-temporal trajectories of resource availability, which might be utilized by plants to increase foraging efficiency in newly-encountered patches. When young or early-in-the-season (segment 1–2), plants are expected to allocate more resources to roots that experience the most promising (steepest increases or shallowest decreases) resource availabilities (e.g., allocating more resources to organs in INC-1 than INC-2). In addition, plants are predicted to avoid allocation to roots experiencing decreasing trajectories (DEC, segment 1–2); although temporarily more abundant with resources, such DEC patches are expected to become poorer than alternative patches in the longer run (segment 2–3).²⁹ However, responsiveness to environmental trajectories is only predicted where the expected period of resource uptake is relatively long, e.g., when plants are still active in segment 2–3, a stipulation which might not be fulfilled in e.g., short-living annuals with life span shorter than segment 1–2.In a recent study, Pisum plants have been demonstrated to be sensitive to temporal changes in nutrient availabilities. Specifically, plants allocated greater biomass to roots growing under dynamically-improving nutrient levels than to roots that grew under continuously higher, yet stationary or deteriorating, nutrient availabilities.²⁹ Allocation to roots in poorer patches might seem maladaptive if only stationary nutrient levels are accounted for, and indeed-almost invariably, plants are known to allocate more resources to organs that experience higher (non-toxic) resource levels (reviewed in ref. ³³). Accordingly, the new findings suggest that rather than merely responding to the prevailing nutrient availabilities, root growth and allocation are also responsive to trajectories of nutrient availabilities (Fig. 1).¹⁰Although Shemesh et al.²⁹ demonstrated trajectory-sensitivity of individual roots to temporal gradient of nutrient availabilities, it is likely that this sensitivity helps plants sense spatial gradients, whereby root tips perceive changes in growth conditions as they move through space.³⁴ Interestingly, because the trajectory-sensitivity was observed when whole roots were subjected to changing nutrient levels, it is likely that trajectory sensitivity in roots is based on the integration of sensory inputs perceived by yet-to-be-determined parts of the root over time, i.e., temporal sensitivity/memory (e.g. reviewed in ref. ³⁵), rather than on the integration of sensory inputs at different locations on the same individual roots (i.e., spatial sensitivity).Besides the direction of change, it is hypothesized that plants are also sensitive to the steepness of environmental trajectories (Fig. 1). This might be especially crucial in short-living annuals, which are expected to only be responsive to trajectories steep enough to be indicative of changes in growth conditions before the expected termination of the growth season (Fig. 1).Studying responsiveness to environmental variability is pivotal for understanding the ecology and evolution of any living organism. However, until recently most attention has been given to the study of responses to stationary spatial and temporal heterogeneities in growth conditions. Exploring the ecological implications and mechanisms of trajectory sensitivity in plants is expected to shed new light on the ways plants learn their immediate environment and anticipate its future challenges and opportunities.     

Human non-CG methylation: Are human stem cells plant-like?

Non-CG methylation is well characterized in plants where it appears to play a role in gene silencing and genomic imprinting. Although strong evidence for the presence of non-CG methylation in mammals has been available for some time, both its origin and function remain elusive. In this review we discuss available evidence on non-CG methylation in mammals in light of evidence suggesting that the human stem cell methylome contains significant levels of methylation outside the CG site.Key words: non-CG methylation, stem cells, Dnmt1, Dnmt3a, human methylomeIn plant cells non-CG sites are methylated de novo by Chromomethylase 3, DRM1 and DRM2. Chromomethylase 3, along with DRM1 and DRM2 combine in the maintenance of methylation at symmetric CpHpG as well as asymmetric DNA sites where they appear to prevent reactivation of transposons.¹ DRM1 and DRM2 modify DNA de novo primarily at asymmetric CpH and CpHpH sequences targeted by siRNA.²Much less information is available on non-CG methylation in mammals. In fact, studies on mammalian non-CG methylation form a tiny fraction of those on CG methylation, even though data for cytosine methylation in other dinucleotides, CA, CT and CC, have been available since the late 1980s.³ Strong evidence for non-CG methylation was found by examining either exogenous DNA sequences, such as plasmid and viral integrants in mouse and human cell lines,^4,5 or transposons and repetitive sequences such as the human L1 retrotransposon⁶ in a human embryonic fibroblast cell line. In the latter study, non-CG methylation observed in L1 was found to be consistent with the capacity of Dnmt1 to methylate slippage intermediates de novo.⁶Non-CG methylation has also been reported at origins of replication^7,8 and a region of the human myogenic gene Myf3.⁹ The Myf3 gene is silenced in non-muscle cell lines but it is not methylated at CGs. Instead, it carries several methylated cytosines within the sequence CCTGG. Gene-specific non-CG methylation was also reported in a study of lymphoma and myeloma cell lines not expressing many B lineage-specific genes.¹⁰ The study focused on one specific gene, B29 and found heavy CG promoter methylation of that gene in most cell lines not expressing it. However, in two other cell lines where the gene was silenced, cytosine methylation was found almost exclusively at CCWGG sites. The authors provided evidence suggesting that CCWGG methylation was sufficient for silencing the B29 promoter and that methylated probes based on B29 sequences had unique gel shift patterns compared to non-methylated but otherwise identical sequences.¹⁰ The latter finding suggests that the presence of the non-CG methylation causes changes in the proteins able to bind the promoter, which could be mechanistically related to the silencing seen with this alternate methylation.Non-CG methylation is rarely seen in DNA isolated from cancer patients. However, the p16 promoter region was reported to contain both CG and non-CG methylation in breast tumor specimens but lacked methylation at these sites in normal breast tissue obtained at mammoplasty.¹¹ Moreover, CWG methylation at the CCWGG sites in the calcitonin gene is not found in normal or leukemic lymphocyte DNA obtained from patients.¹² Further, in DNA obtained from breast cancer patients, MspI sites that are refractory to digestion by MspI and thus candidates for CHG methylation were found to carry CpG methylation.¹³ Their resistance to MspI restriction was found to be caused by an unusual secondary structure in the DNA spanning the MspI site that prevents restriction.¹³ This latter observation suggests caution in interpreting EcoRII/BstNI or EcoRII/BstOI restriction differences as due to CWG methylation, since in contrast to the 37°C incubation temperature required for full EcoRII activity, BstNI and BstOI require incubation at 60°C for full activity where many secondary structures are unstable.The recent report by Lister et al.¹⁴ confirmed a much earlier report by Ramsahoye et al.¹⁵ suggesting that non-CG methylation is prevalent in mammalian stem cell lines. Nearest neighbor analysis was used to detect non-CG methylation in the earlier study on the mouse embryonic stem (ES) cell line,¹⁵ thus global methylation patterning was assessed. Lister et al.¹⁴ extend these findings to human stem cell lines at single-base resolution with whole-genome bisulfite sequencing. They report¹⁴ that the methylome of the human H1 stem cell line and the methylome of the induced pluripotent IMR90 (iPS) cell line are stippled with non-CG methylation while that of the human IMR90 fetal fibroblast cell line is not. While the results of the two studies are complementary, the human methylome study addresses locus specific non-CG methylation. Based on that data,¹⁴ one must conclude that non-CG methylation is not carefully maintained at a given site in the human H1 cell line. The average non-CG site is picked up as methylated in about 25% of the reads whereas the average CG methylation site is picked up in 92% of the reads. Moreover, non-CG methylation is not generally present on both strands and is concentrated in the body of actively transcribed genes.¹⁴Even so, the consistent finding that non-CG methylation appears to be confined to stem cell lines,^14,15 raises the possibility that cancer stem cells¹⁶ carry non-CG methylation while their nonstem progeny in the tumor carry only CG methylation. Given the expected paucity of cancer stem cells in a tumor cell population, it is unlikely that bisulfite sequencing would detect non-CG methylation in DNA isolated from tumor cells since the stem cell population is expected to be only a very minor component of tumor DNA. Published sequences obtained by bisulfite sequencing generally report only CG methylation, and to the best of our knowledge bisulfite sequenced tumor DNA specimens have not reported non-CG methylation. On the other hand, when sequences from cell lines have been reported, bisulfite-mediated genomic sequencing⁸ or ligation mediated PCR¹⁷ methylcytosine signals outside the CG site have been observed. In a more recent study plasmid DNAs carrying the Bcl2-major breakpoint cluster¹⁸ or human breast cancer DNA¹³ treated with bisulfite under non-denaturing conditions, cytosines outside the CG side were only partially converted on only one strand¹⁸ or at a symmetrical CWG site.¹³ In the breast cancer DNA study the apparent CWG methylation was not detected when the DNA was fully denatured before bisulfite treatment.¹³In both stem cell studies, non-CG methylation was attributed to the Dnmt3a,^14,15 a DNA methyltransferase with similarities to the plant DRM methyltransferase family¹⁹ and having the capacity to methylate non-CG sites when expressed in Drosophila melanogaster.¹⁵ DRM proteins however, possess a unique permuted domain structure found exclusively in plants¹⁹ and the associated RNA-directed non-CG DNA methylation has not been reproducibly observed in mammals despite considerable published^20–23 and unpublished efforts in that area. Moreover, reports where methylation was studied often infer methylation changes from 5AzaC reactivation studies²⁴ or find that CG methylation seen in plants but not non-CG methylation is detected.^21,22,25,26 In this regard, it is of interest that the level of non-CG methylation reported in stem cells corresponds to background non-CG methylation observed in vitro with human DNA methyltransferase I,²⁷ and is consistent with the recent report that cultured stem cells are epigenetically unstable.²⁸The function of non-CG methylation remains elusive. A role in gene expression has not been ruled out, as the studies above on Myf3 and B29 suggest.^9,10 However, transgene expression of the bacterial methyltransferase M.EcoRII in a human cell line (HK293), did not affect the CG methylation state at the APC and SerpinB5 genes²⁹ even though the promoters were symmetrically de novo methylated at ^mCWGs within each CCWGG sequence in each promoter. This demonstrated that CG and non-CG methylation are not mutually exclusive as had been suggested by earlier reports.^9,10 That observation is now extended to the human stem cell line methylome where CG and non-CG methylation co-exist.¹⁴ Gene expression at the APC locus was likewise unaffected by transgene expression of M.EcoRII. In those experiments genome wide methylation of the CCWGG site was detected by restriction analysis and bisulfite sequencing,²⁹ however stem cell characteristics were not studied.Many alternative functions can be envisioned for non-CG methylation, but the existing data now constrains them to functions that involve low levels of methylation that are primarily asymmetric. Moreover, inheritance of such methylation patterns requires low fidelity methylation. If methylation were maintained with high fidelity at particular CHG sites one would expect that the spontaneous deamination of 5-methylcytosine would diminish the number of such sites, so as to confine the remaining sites to those positions performing an essential function, as is seen in CG methylation.^30–33 However, depletion of CWG sites is not observed in the human genome.³⁴ Since CWG sites account for only about 50% of the non-CG methylation observed in the stem cell methylome¹⁴ where methylated non-CG sites carry only about 25% methylation, the probability of deamination would be about 13% of that for CWG sites that are subject to maintenance methylation in the germ line. Since mutational depletion of methylated cytosines has to have its primary effect on the germ line, if the maintenance of non-CG methylation were more accurate and more widespread, one would have had to argue that stem cells in the human germ lines lack CWG methylation. As it is the data suggests that whatever function non-CG methylation may have in stem cells, it does not involve accurate somatic inheritance in the germ line.The extensive detail on non-CG methylation in the H1 methylome¹⁴ raises interesting questions about the nature of this form of methylation in human cell lines. A key finding in this report is the contrast between the presence of non-CG methylation in the H1 stem cell line and its absence in the IMR90 human fetal lung fibroblast cell line.¹⁴ This suggests that it may have a role in the origin and maintenance of the pluripotent lineage.¹⁴By analogy with the well known methylated DNA binding proteins specific for CG methylation,³⁵ methylated DNA binding proteins that selectively bind sites of non-CG methylation are expected to exist in stem cells. Currently the only protein reported to have this binding specificity is human Dnmt1.^36–38 While Dnmt1 has been proposed to function stoichiometrically³⁹ and could serve a non-CG binding role in stem cells, this possibility and the possibility that other stem-cell specific non-CG binding proteins might exist remain to be been explored.Finally, the nature of the non-CG methylation patterns in human stem cell lines present potentially difficult technical problems in methylation analysis. First, based on the data in the H1 stem cell methylome,⁴⁰ a standard MS-qPCR for non-CG methylation would be impractical because non-CG sites are infrequent, rarely clustered and are generally characterized by partial asymmetric methylation. This means that a PCR primer that senses the 3 adjacent methylation sites usually recommended for MS-qPCR primer design^41,42 cannot be reliably found. For example in the region near Oct4 (Chr6:31,246,431), a potential MS-qPCR site exists with a suboptimal set of two adjacent CHG sites both methylated on the + strand at Chr6:31,252,225 and 31,252,237.^14,40 However these sites were methylated only in 13/45 and 30/52 reads. Thus the probability that they would both be methylated on the same strand is about 17%. Moreover, reverse primer locations containing non-CG methylation sites are generally too far away for practical bisulfite mediated PCR. Considering the losses associated with bisulfite mediated PCR⁴³ the likelihood that such an MS-qPCR system would detect non-CG methylation in the H1 cell line or stem cells present in a cancer stem cell niche^44,45 is very low.The second difficulty is that methods based on the specificity of MeCP2 and similar methylated DNA binding proteins for enriching methylated DNA (e.g., MIRA,⁴⁶ COMPARE-MS⁴⁷) will discard sequences containing non-CG methylation since they require cooperative binding afforded by runs of adjacent methylated CG sites for DNA capture. This latter property of the methylated cytosine capture techniques makes it also unlikely that methods based on 5-methylcytosine antibodies (e.g., meDIP⁴⁸) will capture non-CG methylation patterns accurately since the stem cell methylome shows that adjacent methylated non-CG sites are rare in comparison to methylated CG sites.¹⁴In summary, whether or not mammalian stem cells in general or human stem cells in particular possess functional plant-like methylation patterns is likely to continue to be an interesting and challenging question. At this point we can conclude that the non-CG patterns reported in human cells appear to differ significantly from the non-CG patterns seen in plants, suggesting that they do not have a common origin or function.