Characterization of the Possible Roles for B Class MADS Box Genes in Regulation of Perianth Formation in Orchid

To investigate sepal/petal/lip formation in Oncidium Gower Ramsey, three paleoAPETALA3 genes, O. Gower Ramsey MADS box gene5 (OMADS5; clade 1), OMADS3 (clade 2), and OMADS9 (clade 3), and one PISTILLATA gene, OMADS8, were characterized. The OMADS8 and OMADS3 mRNAs were expressed in all four floral organs as well as in vegetative leaves. The OMADS9 mRNA was only strongly detected in petals and lips. The mRNA for OMADS5 was only strongly detected in sepals and petals and was significantly down-regulated in lip-like petals and lip-like sepals of peloric mutant flowers. This result revealed a possible negative role for OMADS5 in regulating lip formation. Yeast two-hybrid analysis indicated that OMADS5 formed homodimers and heterodimers with OMADS3 and OMADS9. OMADS8 only formed heterodimers with OMADS3, whereas OMADS3 and OMADS9 formed homodimers and heterodimers with each other. We proposed that sepal/petal/lip formation needs the presence of OMADS3/8 and/or OMADS9. The determination of the final organ identity for the sepal/petal/lip likely depended on the presence or absence of OMADS5. The presence of OMADS5 caused short sepal/petal formation. When OMADS5 was absent, cells could proliferate, resulting in the possible formation of large lips and the conversion of the sepal/petal into lips in peloric mutants. Further analysis indicated that only ectopic expression of OMADS8 but not OMADS5/9 caused the conversion of the sepal into an expanded petal-like structure in transgenic Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) plants.The ABCDE model predicts the formation of any flower organ by the interaction of five classes of homeotic genes in plants (Yanofsky et al., 1990; Jack et al., 1992; Mandel et al., 1992; Goto and Meyerowitz, 1994; Jofuku et al., 1994; Pelaz et al., 2000, 2001; Theißen and Saedler, 2001; Pinyopich et al., 2003; Ditta et al., 2004; Jack, 2004). The A class genes control sepal formation. The A, B, and E class genes work together to regulate petal formation. The B, C, and E class genes control stamen formation. The C and E class genes work to regulate carpel formation, whereas the D class gene is involved in ovule development. MADS box genes seem to have a central role in flower development, because most ABCDE genes encode MADS box proteins (Coen and Meyerowitz, 1991; Weigel and Meyerowitz, 1994; Purugganan et al., 1995; Rounsley et al., 1995; Theißen and Saedler, 1995; Theißen et al., 2000; Theißen, 2001).The function of B group genes, such as APETALA3 (AP3) and PISTILLATA (PI), has been thought to have a major role in specifying petal and stamen development (Jack et al., 1992; Goto and Meyerowitz, 1994; Krizek and Meyerowitz, 1996; Kramer et al., 1998; Hernandez-Hernandez et al., 2007; Kanno et al., 2007; Whipple et al., 2007; Irish, 2009). In Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), mutation in AP3 or PI caused identical phenotypes of second whorl petal conversion into a sepal structure and third flower whorl stamen into a carpel structure (Bowman et al., 1989; Jack et al., 1992; Goto and Meyerowitz, 1994). Similar homeotic conversions for petal and stamen were observed in the mutants of the AP3 and PI orthologs from a number of core eudicots such as Antirrhinum majus, Petunia hybrida, Gerbera hybrida, Solanum lycopersicum, and Nicotiana benthamiana (Sommer et al., 1990; Tröbner et al., 1992; Angenent et al., 1993; van der Krol et al., 1993; Yu et al., 1999; Liu et al., 2004; Vandenbussche et al., 2004; de Martino et al., 2006), from basal eudicot species such as Papaver somniferum and Aquilegia vulgaris (Drea et al., 2007; Kramer et al., 2007), as well as from monocot species such as Zea mays and Oryza sativa (Ambrose et al., 2000; Nagasawa et al., 2003; Prasad and Vijayraghavan, 2003; Yadav et al., 2007; Yao et al., 2008). This indicated that the function of the B class genes AP3 and PI is highly conserved during evolution.It has been thought that B group genes may have arisen from an ancestral gene through multiple gene duplication events (Doyle, 1994; Theißen et al., 1996, 2000; Purugganan, 1997; Kramer et al., 1998; Kramer and Irish, 1999; Lamb and Irish, 2003; Kim et al., 2004; Stellari et al., 2004; Zahn et al., 2005; Hernandez-Hernandez et al., 2007). In the gymnosperms, there was a single putative B class lineage that duplicated to generate the paleoAP3 and PI lineages in angiosperms (Kramer et al., 1998; Theißen et al., 2000; Irish, 2009). The paleoAP3 lineage is composed of AP3 orthologs identified in lower eudicots, magnolid dicots, and monocots (Kramer et al., 1998). Genes in this lineage contain the conserved paleoAP3- and PI-derived motifs in the C-terminal end of the proteins, which have been thought to be characteristics of the B class ancestral gene (Kramer et al., 1998; Tzeng and Yang, 2001; Hsu and Yang, 2002). The PI lineage is composed of PI orthologs that contain a highly conserved PI motif identified in most plant species (Kramer et al., 1998). Subsequently, there was a second duplication at the base of the core eudicots that produced the euAP3 and TM6 lineages, which have been subject to substantial sequence changes in eudicots during evolution (Kramer et al., 1998; Kramer and Irish, 1999). The paleoAP3 motif in the C-terminal end of the proteins was retained in the TM6 lineage and replaced by a conserved euAP3 motif in the euAP3 lineage of most eudicot species (Kramer et al., 1998). In addition, many lineage-specific duplications for paleoAP3 lineage have occurred in plants such as orchids (Hsu and Yang, 2002; Tsai et al., 2004; Kim et al., 2007; Mondragón-Palomino and Theißen, 2008, 2009; Mondragón-Palomino et al., 2009), Ranunculaceae, and Ranunculales (Kramer et al., 2003; Di Stilio et al., 2005; Shan et al., 2006; Kramer, 2009).Unlike the A or C class MADS box proteins, which form homodimers that regulate flower development, the ability of B class proteins to form homodimers has only been reported in gymnosperms and in the paleoAP3 and PI lineages of some monocots. For example, LMADS1 of the lily Lilium longiflorum (Tzeng and Yang, 2001), OMADS3 of the orchid Oncidium Gower Ramsey (Hsu and Yang, 2002), and PeMADS4 of the orchid Phalaenopsis equestris (Tsai et al., 2004) in the paleoAP3 lineage, LRGLOA and LRGLOB of the lily Lilium regale (Winter et al., 2002), TGGLO of the tulip Tulipa gesneriana (Kanno et al., 2003), and PeMADS6 of the orchid P. equestris (Tsai et al., 2005) in the PI lineage, and GGM2 of the gymnosperm Gnetum gnemon (Winter et al., 1999) were able to form homodimers that regulate flower development. Proteins in the euAP3 lineage and in most paleoAP3 lineages were not able to form homodimers and had to interact with PI to form heterodimers in order to regulate petal and stamen development in various plant species (Schwarz-Sommer et al., 1992; Tröbner et al., 1992; Riechmann et al., 1996; Moon et al., 1999; Winter et al., 2002; Kanno et al., 2003; Vandenbussche et al., 2004; Yao et al., 2008). In addition to forming dimers, AP3 and PI were able to interact with other MADS box proteins, such as SEPALLATA1 (SEP1), SEP2, and SEP3, to regulate petal and stamen development (Pelaz et al., 2000; Honma and Goto, 2001; Theißen and Saedler, 2001; Castillejo et al., 2005).Orchids are among the most important plants in the flower market around the world, and research on MADS box genes has been reported for several species of orchids during the past few years (Lu et al., 1993, 2007; Yu and Goh, 2000; Hsu and Yang, 2002; Yu et al., 2002; Hsu et al., 2003; Tsai et al., 2004, 2008; Xu et al., 2006; Guo et al., 2007; Kim et al., 2007; Chang et al., 2009). Unlike the flowers in eudicots, the nearly identical shape of the sepals and petals as well as the production of a unique lip in orchid flowers make them a very special plant species for the study of flower development. Four clades (1–4) of genes in the paleoAP3 lineage have been identified in several orchids (Hsu and Yang, 2002; Tsai et al., 2004; Kim et al., 2007; Mondragón-Palomino and Theißen, 2008, 2009; Mondragón-Palomino et al., 2009). Several works have described the possible interactions among these four clades of paleoAP3 genes and one PI gene that are involved in regulating the differentiation and formation of the sepal/petal/lip of orchids (Tsai et al., 2004; Kim et al., 2007; Mondragón-Palomino and Theißen, 2008, 2009). However, the exact mechanism that involves the orchid B class genes remains unclear and needs to be clarified by more experimental investigations.O. Gower Ramsey is a popular orchid with important economic value in cut flower markets. Only a few studies have been reported on the role of MADS box genes in regulating flower formation in this plant species (Hsu and Yang, 2002; Hsu et al., 2003; Chang et al., 2009). An AP3-like MADS gene that regulates both floral formation and initiation in transgenic Arabidopsis has been reported (Hsu and Yang, 2002). In addition, four AP1/AGAMOUS-LIKE9 (AGL9)-like MADS box genes have been characterized that show novel expression patterns and cause different effects on floral transition and formation in Arabidopsis (Hsu et al., 2003; Chang et al., 2009). Compared with other orchids, the production of a large and well-expanded lip and five small identical sepals/petals makes O. Gower Ramsey a special case for the study of the diverse functions of B class MADS box genes during evolution. Therefore, the isolation of more B class MADS box genes and further study of their roles in the regulation of perianth (sepal/petal/lip) formation during O. Gower Ramsey flower development are necessary. In addition to the clade 2 paleoAP3 gene OMADS3, which was previously characterized in our laboratory (Hsu and Yang, 2002), three more B class MADS box genes, OMADS5, OMADS8, and OMADS9, were characterized from O. Gower Ramsey in this study. Based on the different expression patterns and the protein interactions among these four orchid B class genes, we propose that the presence of OMADS3/8 and/or OMADS9 is required for sepal/petal/lip formation. Further sepal and petal formation at least requires the additional presence of OMADS5, whereas large lip formation was seen when OMADS5 expression was absent. Our results provide a new finding and information pertaining to the roles for orchid B class MADS box genes in the regulation of sepal/petal/lip formation.     

RNA Silencing of Exocyst Genes in the Stigma Impairs the Acceptance of Compatible Pollen in Arabidopsis

Initial pollen-pistil interactions in the Brassicaceae are regulated by rapid communication between pollen grains and stigmatic papillae and are fundamentally important, as they are the first step toward successful fertilization. The goal of this study was to examine the requirement of exocyst subunits, which function in docking secretory vesicles to sites of polarized secretion, in the context of pollen-pistil interactions. One of the exocyst subunit genes, EXO70A1, was previously identified as an essential factor in the stigma for the acceptance of compatible pollen in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) and Brassica napus. We hypothesized that EXO70A1, along with other exocyst subunits, functions in the Brassicaceae dry stigma to deliver cargo-bearing secretory vesicles to the stigmatic papillar plasma membrane, under the pollen attachment site, for pollen hydration and pollen tube entry. Here, we investigated the functions of exocyst complex genes encoding the remaining seven subunits, SECRETORY3 (SEC3), SEC5, SEC6, SEC8, SEC10, SEC15, and EXO84, in Arabidopsis stigmas following compatible pollinations. Stigma-specific RNA-silencing constructs were used to suppress the expression of each exocyst subunit individually. The early postpollination stages of pollen grain adhesion, pollen hydration, pollen tube penetration, seed set, and overall fertility were analyzed in the transgenic lines to evaluate the requirement of each exocyst subunit. Our findings provide comprehensive evidence that all eight exocyst subunits are necessary in the stigma for the acceptance of compatible pollen. Thus, this work implicates a fully functional exocyst complex as a component of the compatible pollen response pathway to promote pollen acceptance.In flowering plants, sexual reproduction occurs as a result of constant communication between the male gametophyte and the female reproductive organ, from the initial acceptance of compatible pollen to final step of successful fertilization (for review, see Beale and Johnson, 2013; Dresselhaus and Franklin-Tong, 2013; Higashiyama and Takeuchi, 2015). In the Brassicaceae, the stigmas that present a receptive surface for pollen are categorized as dry and covered with unicellular papillae (Heslop-Harrison and Shivanna, 1977). Communication is initiated rapidly following contact of a pollen grain with a stigmatic papilla, as the role of the papillae is to regulate the early cellular responses leading to compatible pollen germination. The basal compatible pollen recognition response also presents a barrier to foreign pollen or is inhibited with self-incompatible pollen (for review, see Dickinson, 1995; Hiscock and Allen, 2008; Chapman and Goring, 2010; Indriolo et al., 2014b).The initial adhesive interaction between the pollen grain and the papilla cell in the Brassicaceae is mediated by the exine of the pollen grain and the surface of the stigmatic papilla (Preuss et al., 1993; Zinkl et al., 1999). A stronger connection results between the adhered pollen grain and the stigmatic papilla with the formation of a lipid-protein interface (foot) derived from the pollen coat and the stigmatic papillar surface (Mattson et al., 1974; Stead et al., 1980; Gaude and Dumas, 1986; Elleman and Dickinson, 1990; Elleman et al., 1992; Preuss et al., 1993; Mayfield et al., 2001). It is at this point that a Brassicaceae-specific recognition of compatible pollen is proposed to occur (Hülskamp et al., 1995; Pruitt, 1999), though the nature of this recognition system is not clearly defined. Two stigma-specific Brassica oleracea glycoproteins, the S-Locus Glycoprotein and S-Locus Related1 (SLR1) protein, play a role in compatible pollen adhesion (Luu et al., 1997, 1999), potentially through interactions with the pollen coat proteins, PCP-A1 and SLR1-BP, respectively (Doughty et al., 1998; Takayama et al., 2000). The simultaneous recognition of self-incompatible pollen would also take place at this stage (for review, see Dresselhaus and Franklin-Tong, 2013; Indriolo et al., 2014b; Sawada et al., 2014). Thus, this interface not only provides a strengthened bond between the pollen grain and stigmatic papilla, but likely facilitates the interaction of signaling proteins from both partners to promote specific cellular responses in the stigmatic papilla toward the pollen grain.One response regulated by these interactions is the release of water from the stigmatic papilla to the adhered compatible pollen grain to enable the pollen grain to rehydrate, germinate, and produce a pollen tube (Zuberi and Dickinson, 1985; Preuss et al., 1993). Upon hydration, the pollen tube emerges at the site of pollen-papilla contact and penetrates the stigma surface between the plasma membrane and the overlaying cell wall (Elleman et al., 1992; Kandasamy et al., 1994). Pollen tube entry into the stigmatic surface represents a second barrier, selecting compatible pollen tubes. Subsequently, the compatible pollen tubes traverse down to the base of the stigma, enter the transmitting tract, and grow intracellularly toward ovules for fertilization. Pollen-pistil interactions at these later stages are also highly regulated (for review, see Beale and Johnson, 2013; Dresselhaus and Franklin-Tong, 2013; Higashiyama and Takeuchi, 2015).EXO70A1, a subunit of the exocyst, was identified as a factor involved in early pollen-stigma interactions, where it is required in the stigma for the acceptance of compatible pollen and inhibited by the self-incompatibility response (Samuel et al., 2009). Stigmas from the Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) exo70A1 mutant display constitutive rejection of wild-type-compatible pollen (Samuel et al., 2009; Safavian et al., 2014). This stigmatic defect was rescued by the stigma-specific expression of an Red Fluorescent Protein (RFP):EXO70A1 transgene (Samuel et al., 2009) or partially rescued by providing a high relative humidity environment (Safavian et al., 2014). In addition, the stigma-specific expression of an EXO70A1 RNA interference construct in Brassica napus ‘Westar’ resulted in impaired compatible pollen acceptance and a corresponding reduction in seed production compared with compatible pollinations with wild-type B. napus ‘Westar’ pistils (Samuel et al., 2009). From these studies, EXO70A1 was found to be a critical component in stigmatic papillae to promote compatible pollen hydration and pollen tube entry through the stigma surface. One of the functions of the exocyst is to mediate polar secretion (for review, see Heider and Munson, 2012; Zárský et al., 2013; Synek et al., 2014). Consistent with this, previous studies have observed vesicle-like structures in proximity to the stigmatic papillar plasma membrane in response to compatible pollen in both Brassica spp. and Arabidopsis species (Elleman and Dickinson, 1990, 1996; Dickinson, 1995; Safavian and Goring, 2013; Indriolo et al., 2014a). The secretory activity is predicted to promote pollen hydration and pollen tube entry. As well, consistent with the proposed inhibition of EXO70A1 by the self-incompatibility pathway (Samuel et al., 2009), a complete absence or a significant reduction of vesicle-like structures at the stigmatic papillar plasma membrane was observed in the exo70A1 mutant and with self-incompatible pollen (Safavian and Goring, 2013; Indriolo et al., 2014a).The exocyst is a well-defined complex in yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) and animal systems, consisting of eight subunits, SEC3, SEC5, SEC6, SEC8, SEC10, SEC15, EXO70, and EXO84 (TerBush et al., 1996; Guo et al., 1999). Exocyst subunit mutants were first identified in yeast as secretory mutants displaying a cytosolic accumulation of secretory vesicles (Novick et al., 1980). Subsequent work defined roles for the exocyst in vesicle docking at target membranes in processes such as regulated secretion, polarized exocytosis, and cytokinesis to facilitate membrane fusion by Soluble NSF Attachment protein Receptor (SNARE) complexes (for review, see Heider and Munson, 2012; Liu and Guo, 2012). In plants, genes encoding all eight exocyst subunits have been identified, and many of these genes exist as multiple copies. For example, the Arabidopsis genome contains single copy genes for SEC6 and SEC8, two copies each for SECRETORY3 (SEC3), SEC5, SEC10, and SEC15, three EXO84 genes, and 23 EXO70 genes (Chong et al., 2010; Cvrčková et al., 2012; Vukašinović et al., 2014). Ultrastructural studies using electron tomography uncovered the existence of a structure resembling the exocyst in Arabidopsis (Otegui and Staehelin, 2004; Seguí-Simarro et al., 2004). Localization studies of specific Arabidopsis exocyst subunits also supported conserved roles in polarized exocytosis and cytokinesis in plants. Localization studies have shown EXO70, SEC6, and SEC8 at the growing tip of pollen tubes (Hála et al., 2008), EXO70A1 at the stigmatic papillar plasma membrane (Samuel et al., 2009), SEC3a, SEC6, SEC8, SEC15b, EXO70A1, and EXO84b at the root epidermal cell plasma membrane and developing cell plate (Fendrych et al., 2010, 2013; Wu et al., 2013; Zhang et al., 2013; Rybak et al., 2014), and SEC3a at the plasma membrane in the embryo and root hair (Zhang et al., 2013). Similar to the yeast exocyst mutants, vesicle accumulation has also been observed in the exo70A1 and exo84b mutants (Fendrych et al., 2010; Safavian and Goring, 2013). Taken together, these findings strongly support that plant exocyst subunits function in vivo in vesicle docking at sites of polarized secretion and cytokinesis (for review, see Zárský et al., 2013). In support of this, a recent study investigating Transport Protein Particle (TRAPP)II and exocyst complexes during cytokinesis in Arabidopsis has identified all eight exocyst components in immunoprecipitated complexes (SEC3a/SEC3b, SEC5a, SEC6, SEC8, SEC10, SEC15b, EXO70A1, EXO70H2, and EXO84b; Rybak et al., 2014).Several plant exocyst subunit genes have been implicated in biological processes that rely on regulated vesicle trafficking, where corresponding mutants have displayed a range of growth defects. At the cellular level, these phenotypes have been associated with decreased cell elongation and polar growth (Cole et al., 2005, 2014; Wen et al., 2005; Synek et al., 2006), defects in cytokinesis and cell plate formation (Fendrych et al., 2010; Wu et al., 2013; Rybak et al., 2014), and disrupted Pin-Formed (PIN) auxin efflux carrier recycling and polar auxin transport (Drdová et al., 2013). Several Arabidopsis subunit mutants display strong growth defects such as the sec3a mutant with an embryo-lethal phenotype (Zhang et al., 2013), sec6, sec8, and exo84b mutants with severely dwarfed phenotypes and defects in root growth (Fendrych et al., 2010; Wu et al., 2013; Cole et al., 2014), and exo70A1 with a milder dwarf phenotype (Synek et al., 2006). The Arabidopsis exo70A1 mutant has also been reported to have defects in root hair elongation, hypocotyl elongation, compatible pollen acceptance, seed coat deposition, and tracheary element differentiation (Synek et al., 2006; Samuel et al., 2009; Kulich et al., 2010; Li et al., 2013). Essential roles for other exocyst subunits include Arabidopsis SEC5a/SEC5b, SEC6, SEC8, and SEC15a/SEC15b in male gametophyte development and pollen tube growth (Cole et al., 2005; Hála et al., 2008; Wu et al., 2013), SEC8 in seed coat deposition (Kulich et al., 2010), SEC5a, SEC8, EXO70A1, and EXO84b in root meristem size and root cell elongation (Cole et al., 2014), and a maize (Zea mays) SEC3 homolog in root hair elongation (Wen et al., 2005). Finally, the Arabidopsis EXO70B1, EXO70B2, and EXO70H1 subunits have been implicated in plant defense responses (Pecenková et al., 2011; Stegmann et al., 2012; Kulich et al., 2013; Stegmann et al., 2013).Even with these detailed studies on the functions of exocyst subunits in plants, a systematic demonstration of the requirement of all eight exocyst subunits in a specific plant biological process is currently lacking. EXO70A1 was previously identified as an essential factor in the stigma for compatible pollen-pistil interactions in Arabidopsis and B. napus (Samuel et al., 2009), and we hypothesized that this protein functions as part of the exocyst complex to tether post-Golgi secretory vesicles to stigmatic papillar plasma membrane (Safavian and Goring, 2013). To provide support for the proposed biological role of the exocyst in the stigma for compatible pollen acceptance, we investigated the roles of the remaining seven subunits, SEC3, SEC5, SEC6, SEC8, SEC10, SEC15, and EXO84, in Arabidopsis stigmatic papillae. Given that some Arabidopsis exocyst subunits were previously determined to be essential at earlier growth stages, stigma-specific RNA-silencing constructs were used for each exocyst subunit, and the early postpollination stages were analyzed for these transgenic lines. Our collective data demonstrates that all eight exocyst subunits are required in the stigma for the early stages of compatible pollen-pistil interactions.     

Calcineurin B-Like Protein-Interacting Protein Kinase CIPK21 Regulates Osmotic and Salt Stress Responses in Arabidopsis

The role of calcium-mediated signaling has been extensively studied in plant responses to abiotic stress signals. Calcineurin B-like proteins (CBLs) and CBL-interacting protein kinases (CIPKs) constitute a complex signaling network acting in diverse plant stress responses. Osmotic stress imposed by soil salinity and drought is a major abiotic stress that impedes plant growth and development and involves calcium-signaling processes. In this study, we report the functional analysis of CIPK21, an Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) CBL-interacting protein kinase, ubiquitously expressed in plant tissues and up-regulated under multiple abiotic stress conditions. The growth of a loss-of-function mutant of CIPK21, cipk21, was hypersensitive to high salt and osmotic stress conditions. The calcium sensors CBL2 and CBL3 were found to physically interact with CIPK21 and target this kinase to the tonoplast. Moreover, preferential localization of CIPK21 to the tonoplast was detected under salt stress condition when coexpressed with CBL2 or CBL3. These findings suggest that CIPK21 mediates responses to salt stress condition in Arabidopsis, at least in part, by regulating ion and water homeostasis across the vacuolar membranes.Drought and salinity cause osmotic stress in plants and severely affect crop productivity throughout the world. Plants respond to osmotic stress by changing a number of cellular processes (Xiong et al., 1999; Xiong and Zhu, 2002; Bartels and Sunkar, 2005; Boudsocq and Lauriére, 2005). Some of these changes include activation of stress-responsive genes, regulation of membrane transport at both plasma membrane (PM) and vacuolar membrane (tonoplast) to maintain water and ionic homeostasis, and metabolic changes to produce compatible osmolytes such as Pro (Stewart and Lee, 1974; Krasensky and Jonak, 2012). It has been well established that a specific calcium (Ca²⁺) signature is generated in response to a particular environmental stimulus (Trewavas and Malhó, 1998; Scrase-Field and Knight, 2003; Luan, 2009; Kudla et al., 2010). The Ca²⁺ changes are primarily perceived by several Ca²⁺ sensors such as calmodulin (Reddy, 2001; Luan et al., 2002), Ca²⁺-dependent protein kinases (Harper and Harmon, 2005), calcineurin B-like proteins (CBLs; Luan et al., 2002; Batistič and Kudla, 2004; Pandey, 2008; Luan, 2009; Sanyal et al., 2015), and other Ca²⁺-binding proteins (Reddy, 2001; Shao et al., 2008) to initiate various cellular responses.Plant CBL-type Ca²⁺ sensors interact with and activate CBL-interacting protein kinases (CIPKs) that phosphorylate downstream components to transduce Ca²⁺ signals (Liu et al., 2000; Luan et al., 2002; Batistič and Kudla, 2004; Luan, 2009). In several plant species, multiple members have been identified in the CBL and CIPK family (Luan et al., 2002; Kolukisaoglu et al., 2004; Pandey, 2008; Batistič and Kudla, 2009; Weinl and Kudla, 2009; Pandey et al., 2014). Involvement of specific CBL-CIPK pair to decode a particular type of signal entails the alternative and selective complex formation leading to stimulus-response coupling (D’Angelo et al., 2006; Batistič et al., 2010).Several CBL and CIPK family members have been implicated in plant responses to drought, salinity, and osmotic stress based on genetic analysis of Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) mutants (Zhu, 2002; Cheong et al., 2003, 2007; Kim et al., 2003; Pandey et al., 2004, 2008; D’Angelo et al., 2006; Qin et al., 2008; Tripathi et al., 2009; Held et al., 2011; Tang et al., 2012; Drerup et al., 2013; Eckert et al., 2014). A few CIPKs have also been functionally characterized by gain-of-function approach in crop plants such as rice (Oryza sativa), pea (Pisum sativum), and maize (Zea mays) and were found to be involved in osmotic stress responses (Mahajan et al., 2006; Xiang et al., 2007; Yang et al., 2008; Tripathi et al., 2009; Zhao et al., 2009; Cuéllar et al., 2010).In this report, we examined the role of the Arabidopsis CIPK21 gene in osmotic stress response by reverse genetic analysis. The loss-of-function mutant plants became hypersensitive to salt and mannitol stress conditions, suggesting that CIPK21 is involved in the regulation of osmotic stress response in Arabidopsis. These findings are further supported by an enhanced tonoplast targeting of the cytoplasmic CIPK21 through interaction with the vacuolar Ca²⁺ sensors CBL2 and CBL3 under salt stress condition.     

Extra-Large G Proteins Expand the Repertoire of Subunits in Arabidopsis Heterotrimeric G Protein Signaling

Heterotrimeric G proteins, consisting of Gα, Gβ, and Gγ subunits, are a conserved signal transduction mechanism in eukaryotes. However, G protein subunit numbers in diploid plant genomes are greatly reduced as compared with animals and do not correlate with the diversity of functions and phenotypes in which heterotrimeric G proteins have been implicated. In addition to GPA1, the sole canonical Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) Gα subunit, Arabidopsis has three related proteins: the extra-large GTP-binding proteins XLG1, XLG2, and XLG3. We demonstrate that the XLGs can bind Gβγ dimers (AGB1 plus a Gγ subunit: AGG1, AGG2, or AGG3) with differing specificity in yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) three-hybrid assays. Our in silico structural analysis shows that XLG3 aligns closely to the crystal structure of GPA1, and XLG3 also competes with GPA1 for Gβγ binding in yeast. We observed interaction of the XLGs with all three Gβγ dimers at the plasma membrane in planta by bimolecular fluorescence complementation. Bioinformatic and localization studies identified and confirmed nuclear localization signals in XLG2 and XLG3 and a nuclear export signal in XLG3, which may facilitate intracellular shuttling. We found that tunicamycin, salt, and glucose hypersensitivity and increased stomatal density are agb1-specific phenotypes that are not observed in gpa1 mutants but are recapitulated in xlg mutants. Thus, XLG-Gβγ heterotrimers provide additional signaling modalities for tuning plant G protein responses and increase the repertoire of G protein heterotrimer combinations from three to 12. The potential for signal partitioning and competition between the XLGs and GPA1 is a new paradigm for plant-specific cell signaling.The classical heterotrimeric G protein consists of a GDP/GTP-binding Gα subunit with GTPase activity bound to an obligate dimer formed by Gβ and Gγ subunits. In the signaling paradigm largely elucidated from mammalian systems, the plasma membrane-associated heterotrimer contains Gα in its GDP-bound form. Upon receiving a molecular signal, typically transduced by a transmembrane protein (e.g. a G protein-coupled receptor), Gα exchanges GDP for GTP and dissociates from the Gβγ dimer. Both Gα and Gβγ interact with intracellular effectors to initiate downstream signaling cascades. The intrinsic GTPase activity of Gα restores Gα to the GDP-bound form, which binds Gβγ, thereby reconstituting the heterotrimer (McCudden et al., 2005; Oldham and Hamm, 2008).Signal transduction through a heterotrimeric G protein complex is an evolutionarily conserved eukaryotic mechanism common to metazoa and plants, although there are distinct differences in the functional intricacies between the evolutionary branches (Jones et al., 2011a, 2011b; Bradford et al., 2013). The numbers of each subunit encoded within genomes, and therefore the potential for combinatorial complexity within the heterotrimer, is one of the most striking differences between plants and animals. For example, the human genome encodes 23 Gα (encoded by 16 genes), five Gβ, and 12 Gγ subunits (Hurowitz et al., 2000; McCudden et al., 2005; Birnbaumer, 2007). The Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) genome, however, only encodes one canonical Gα (GPA1; Ma et al., 1990), one Gβ (AGB1; Weiss et al., 1994), and three Gγ (AGG1, AGG2, and AGG3) subunits (Mason and Botella, 2000, 2001; Chakravorty et al., 2011), while the rice (Oryza sativa) genome encodes one Gα (Ishikawa et al., 1995), one Gβ (Ishikawa et al., 1996), and either four or five Gγ subunits (Kato et al., 2004; Chakravorty et al., 2011; Botella, 2012). As expected, genomes of polyploid plants have more copies due to genome duplication, with the soybean (Glycine max) genome encoding four Gα, four Gβ (Bisht et al., 2011), and 10 Gγ subunits (Choudhury et al., 2011). However, Arabidopsis heterotrimeric G proteins have been implicated in a surprisingly large number of phenotypes, which is seemingly contradictory given the relative scarcity of subunits. Arabidopsis G proteins have been implicated in cell division (Ullah et al., 2001; Chen et al., 2006) and morphological development in various tissues, including hypocotyls (Ullah et al., 2001, 2003), roots (Ullah et al., 2003; Chen et al., 2006; Li et al., 2012), leaves (Lease et al., 2001; Ullah et al., 2001), inflorescences (Ullah et al., 2003), and flowers and siliques (Lease et al., 2001), as well as in pathogen responses (Llorente et al., 2005; Trusov et al., 2006; Cheng et al., 2015), regulation of stomatal movement (Wang et al., 2001; Coursol et al., 2003; Fan et al., 2008) and development (Zhang et al., 2008; Nilson and Assmann, 2010), cell wall composition (Delgado-Cerezo et al., 2012), responses to various light stimuli (Warpeha et al., 2007; Botto et al., 2009), responses to multiple abiotic stimuli (Huang et al., 2006; Pandey et al., 2006; Trusov et al., 2007; Zhang et al., 2008; Colaneri et al., 2014), responses to various hormones during germination (Ullah et al., 2002), and postgermination development (Ullah et al., 2002; Pandey et al., 2006; Trusov et al., 2007). Since the Gγ subunit appeared to be the only subunit that provides diversity in heterotrimer composition in Arabidopsis, it was proposed that all functional specificity in heterotrimeric G protein signaling was provided by the Gγ subunit (Trusov et al., 2007; Chakravorty et al., 2011; Thung et al., 2012, 2013). This allowed for only three heterotrimer combinations to account for the wide range of G protein-associated phenotypes.In addition to the above typical G protein subunits, the plant kingdom contains a conserved protein family of extra-large GTP-binding proteins (XLGs). XLGs differ from typical Gα subunits in that they possess a long N-terminal extension of unknown function, but they are similar in that they all have a typical C-terminal Gα-like region, with five semiconserved G-box (G1–G5) motifs. The XLGs also possess the two sequence features that differentiate heterotrimeric G protein Gα subunits from monomeric G proteins: a helical region between the G1 and G2 motifs and an Asp/Glu-rich loop between the G3 and G4 motifs (Lee and Assmann, 1999; Ding et al., 2008; Heo et al., 2012). The Arabidopsis XLG family comprises XLG1, XLG2, and XLG3, and all three have demonstrated GTP-binding and GTPase activities, although they differ from GPA1 in exhibiting a much slower rate of GTP hydrolysis, with a Ca²⁺ cofactor requirement instead of an Mg²⁺ requirement, as for canonical Gα proteins (Heo et al., 2012). All three Arabidopsis XLGs were observed to be nuclear localized (Ding et al., 2008). Although much less is known about XLGs than canonical Gα subunits, XLG2 positively regulates resistance to the bacterial pathogen Pseudomonas syringae and was immunoprecipitated with AGB1 from tissue infected with P. syringae (Zhu et al., 2009). xlg3 mutants, like agb1 mutants, are impaired in root-waving and root-skewing responses (Pandey et al., 2008). During the preparation of this report, Maruta et al. (2015) further investigated XLG2, particularly focusing on the link between XLG2 and Gβγ in pathogen responses. Based on symptom progression in xlg mutants, they found that XLG2 is a positive regulator of resistance to both bacterial and fungal pathogens, with a minor contribution from XLG3 in resistance to Fusarium oxysporum. XLG2 and XLG3 are also positive regulators of reactive oxygen species (ROS) production in response to pathogen-associated molecular pattern elicitors. The resistance and pathogen-associated molecular pattern-induced ROS phenotypes of the agg1 agg2 and xlg2 xlg3 double mutants were not additive in an agg1 agg2 xlg2 xlg3 quadruple mutant, indicating that these two XLGs and the two Gγ subunits function in the same, rather than parallel, pathways. Unfortunately, the close proximity of XLG2 and AGB1 on chromosome 4 precluded the generation of an agb1 xlg2 double mutant; therefore, direct genetic evidence of XLG2 and AGB1 interaction is still lacking, but physical interactions between XLG2 and the Gβγ dimers were shown by yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) three-hybrid and bimolecular fluorescence complementation (BiFC) assays (Maruta et al., 2015). Localization of all three XLGs was also reexamined, indicating that XLGs are capable of localizing to the plasma membrane in addition to the nucleus (Maruta et al., 2015).Interestingly, several other plant G protein-related phenotypes, in addition to pathogen resistance, have been observed only in Gβ and Gγ mutants, with opposite phenotypes observed in Gα (gpa1) mutants. Traditionally, the observation of opposite phenotypes in Gα versus Gβγ mutants in plants and other organisms has mechanistically been attributed to signaling mediated by free Gβγ, which increases in abundance in the absence of Gα. However, an intriguing alternative is that XLG proteins fulfill a Gα-like role in forming heterotrimeric complexes with Gβγ and function in non-GPA1-based G protein signaling processes. If XLGs function like Gα subunits, the corresponding increase in subunit diversity could potentially account for the diversity of G protein phenotypes. In light of this possibility, we assessed the heterotrimerization potential of all possible XLG and Gβγ dimer combinations, XLG localization and its regulation by Gβγ, and the effect of xlg mutation on selected known phenotypes associated with heterotrimeric G proteins. Our results provide compelling evidence for the formation of XLG-Gβγ heterotrimers and reveal that plant G protein signaling is substantially more complex than previously thought.     

Phylogenetic Analysis of ADP-Glucose Pyrophosphorylase Subunits Reveals a Role of Subunit Interfaces in the Allosteric Properties of the Enzyme

ADP-glucose pyrophosphorylase (AGPase) catalyzes a rate-limiting step in glycogen and starch synthesis in bacteria and plants, respectively. Plant AGPase consists of two large and two small subunits that were derived by gene duplication. AGPase large subunits have functionally diverged, leading to different kinetic and allosteric properties. Amino acid changes that could account for these differences were identified previously by evolutionary analysis. In this study, these large subunit residues were mapped onto a modeled structure of the maize (Zea mays) endosperm enzyme. Surprisingly, of 29 amino acids identified via evolutionary considerations, 17 were located at subunit interfaces. Fourteen of the 29 amino acids were mutagenized in the maize endosperm large subunit (SHRUNKEN-2 [SH2]), and resulting variants were expressed in Escherichia coli with the maize endosperm small subunit (BT2). Comparisons of the amount of glycogen produced in E. coli, and the kinetic and allosteric properties of the variants with wild-type SH2/BT2, indicate that 11 variants differ from the wild type in enzyme properties or in vivo glycogen level. More interestingly, six of nine residues located at subunit interfaces exhibit altered allosteric properties. These results indicate that the interfaces between the large and small subunits are important for the allosteric properties of AGPase, and changes at these interfaces contribute to AGPase functional specialization. Our results also demonstrate that evolutionary analysis can greatly facilitate enzyme structure-function analyses.ADP-glucose pyrophosphorylase (AGPase) catalyzes the conversion of Glc-1-P (G-1-P) and ATP to ADP-Glc and pyrophosphate. This reaction represents a rate-limiting step in starch synthesis (Hannah, 2005). AGPase is an allosteric enzyme whose activity is regulated by small effector molecules. In plants, AGPase is activated by 3-phosphoglyceraldehyde (3-PGA) and deactivated by inorganic phosphate (Pi).Plant AGPase is a heterotetramer consisting of two identical large and two identical small subunits. The large and small subunits of AGPase were generated by a gene duplication. Subsequent sequence divergence has given rise to complementary rather than interchangeable subunits. Indeed, both subunits are needed for AGPase activity (Hannah and Nelson, 1976, Burger et al., 2003). Biochemical studies have indicated that both subunits are important for catalytic and allosteric properties (Hannah and Nelson, 1976; Greene et al., 1996a, 1996b; Ballicora et al., 1998; Laughlin et al., 1998; Frueauf et al., 2001; Kavakli et al., 2001a, 2001b; Cross et al., 2004, 2005; Hwang et al., 2005, 2006, 2007; Kim et al., 2007; Ventriglia et al., 2008). Surprisingly, Georgelis et al. (2007, 2008) showed that, in angiosperms, the small subunit is under greater evolutionary pressure compared with the large subunit. Detailed analyses have shown that the greater constraint on the small subunit is due to its broader tissue expression patterns compared with the large subunit and the fact that the small subunit must interact with multiple large subunits.Large subunits have undergone more duplication events than have small subunits (Georgelis et al., 2008). This has led to the creation of five groups of large subunits that differ in their patterns of tissue of expression (Akihiro et al., 2005; Crevillen et al., 2005; Ohdan et al., 2005). Crevillen et al. (2003) studied the biochemical properties of four Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) AGPases consisting of the four different large subunits and the only functional small subunit in Arabidopsis. The different AGPases had different kinetic and allosteric properties. More specifically, the AGPases differed in their affinity for the allosteric regulator 3-PGA and the substrates G-1-P and ATP. This possibly reflects the different 3-PGA, G-1-P, and ATP levels in the various tissues. This evidence indicates that not only did the different large subunit groups subfunctionalize in terms of expression, but also these groups may have specialized in terms of protein function. While the study of Crevillen et al. (2003) pointed to functional specialization of the large subunit, the identity of the amino acid sites in the large subunit that account for these kinetic and allosteric differences was not pursued.Georgelis et al. (2008) presented supporting evidence for AGPase large subunit specialization by identifying positively selected amino acid sites in the phylogenetic branches following gene duplication events. We also identified amino acid residues that were conserved in one large subunit group but not conserved in another large subunit group (type I functional divergence; Gu, 1999) and amino acid residues that are conserved within large subunit groups but are variable among large subunit groups (type II functional divergence; Gu, 2006). Positively selected type I and type II sites could have contributed to specialization of the different large subunit groups. Indeed, positively selected type II sites in several proteins have been proven via site-directed mutagenesis (Bishop, 2005; Norrgård et al., 2006; Cavatorta et al., 2008; Courville et al., 2008) to be important for protein function and functional specialization. Additionally, several positively selected type I and type II amino acid sites in the large AGPase subunit identified in our previous evolutionary analysis (Georgelis et al., 2008) have been implicated in the kinetic and allosteric properties and heat stability of AGPase. The role of these sites was demonstrated by site-directed mutagenesis experiments of large subunits from Arabidopsis, maize endosperm, and potato (Solanum tuberosum) tuber (Ballicora et al., 1998, 2005; Kavakli et al., 2001a; Jin et al., 2005; Linebarger et al., 2005; Ventriglia et al., 2008). These analyses indicate that the rest of the amino acid sites identified as positive type I and type II sites in our previous evolutionary analysis (Georgelis et al., 2008) represent promising candidate targets for mutagenesis.To identify large subunit amino acids that are possibly important in controlling enzyme properties and that may have contributed to large subunit specialization, we conducted site-directed mutagenesis of the maize endosperm large subunit encoded by Shrunken-2 (Sh2). We specifically identified amino acids of SH2 that correspond to amino acid sites that were detected as positive type I and type II sites during the large subunit evolution (Georgelis et al., 2008). We then replaced the SH2 residues with amino acids of a group different from the SH2 family. Several amino acid sites important for the kinetic and allosteric properties and heat stability of AGPase were identified. Our results indicate that the subunit interfaces between the large and small subunits are important for the allosteric properties of AGPase. They also indicate that amino acid changes at subunit interfaces have been important for AGPase specialization in terms of allosteric properties. These experiments also support the idea that the majority of positively selected sites as detected by codon substitution models (Nielsen and Yang, 1998; Yang et al., 2000) and type II sites are not false positives. Site-directed mutagenesis of such sites can greatly facilitate enzyme structure-function analyses.     

Phosphorylation of the C Terminus of RHD3 Has a Critical Role in Homotypic ER Membrane Fusion in Arabidopsis

The endoplasmic reticulum (ER) consists of dynamically changing tubules and cisternae. In animals and yeast, homotypic ER membrane fusion is mediated by fusogens (atlastin and Sey1p, respectively) that are membrane-associated dynamin-like GTPases. In Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), another dynamin-like GTPase, ROOT HAIR DEFECTIVE3 (RHD3), has been proposed as an ER membrane fusogen, but direct evidence is lacking. Here, we show that RHD3 has an ER membrane fusion activity that is enhanced by phosphorylation of its C terminus. The ER network was RHD3-dependently reconstituted from the cytosol and microsome fraction of tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) cultured cells by exogenously adding GTP, ATP, and F-actin. We next established an in vitro assay system of ER tubule formation with Arabidopsis ER vesicles, in which addition of GTP caused ER sac formation from the ER vesicles. Subsequent application of a shearing force to this system triggered the formation of tubules from the ER sacs in an RHD-dependent manner. Unexpectedly, in the absence of a shearing force, Ser/Thr kinase treatment triggered RHD3-dependent tubule formation. Mass spectrometry showed that RHD3 was phosphorylated at multiple Ser and Thr residues in the C terminus. An antibody against the RHD3 C-terminal peptide abolished kinase-triggered tubule formation. When the Ser cluster was deleted or when the Ser residues were replaced with Ala residues, kinase treatment had no effect on tubule formation. Kinase treatment induced the oligomerization of RHD3. Neither phosphorylation-dependent modulation of membrane fusion nor oligomerization has been reported for atlastin or Sey1p. Taken together, we propose that phosphorylation-stimulated oligomerization of RHD3 enhances ER membrane fusion to form the ER network.In eukaryotic cells, the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) is the organelle with the largest membrane area. The ER consists of an elaborate network of interconnected membrane tubules and cisternae that is continually moving and being remodeled (Friedman and Voeltz, 2011). In plant cells, ER movement and remodeling is primarily driven by the actin-myosin XI cytoskeleton (Sparkes et al., 2009; Ueda et al., 2010; Yokota et al., 2011; Griffing et al., 2014) and secondarily by the microtubule cytoskeleton (Hamada et al., 2014). Several factors involved in creating the ER architecture have been also identified (Anwar et al., 2012; Chen et al., 2012; Goyal and Blackstone, 2013; Sackmann, 2014; Stefano et al., 2014a; Westrate et al., 2015). Among them, ER membrane-bound GTPases, animal atlastins and yeast Sey1p (Synthetic Enhancement of Yop1), function as ER fusogens to form the interconnected tubular network (Hu et al., 2009; Orso et al., 2009; Anwar et al., 2012). Atlastin molecules on the two opposed membranes have been proposed to transiently dimerize to attract the two membranes to each other (Bian et al., 2011; Byrnes and Sondermann, 2011; Morin-Leisk et al., 2011; Moss et al., 2011; Lin et al., 2012; Byrnes et al., 2013). Closely attracted lipid bilayers are supposed to be destabilized by an amphipathic helical domain at the atlastin C terminus to facilitate membrane fusion (Bian et al., 2011; Liu et al., 2012; Faust et al., 2015). Knockdown of atlastins leads to fragmentation of the ER and unbranched ER tubules, while overexpression of atlastins enhances ER membrane fusion, which enlarges the ER profiles (Hu et al., 2009; Orso et al., 2009).An Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) protein, ROOT HAIR DEFECTIVE3 (RHD3), has been proposed as a fusogen because (1) when it is disrupted, the ER network is modified into large cable-like strands of poorly branched membranes (Zheng et al., 2004; Chen et al., 2011; Stefano et al., 2012), (2) it shares sequence similarity with the above-mentioned fusogen Sey1p (Hu et al., 2009), and (3) it has structural similarity to atlastin and Sey1p, with a functional GTPase domain at the N-terminal cytosolic domain (Stefano et al., 2012) followed by two transmembrane domains and a cytosolic tail. RHD3 has a longer cytosolic C-terminal tail than do atlastin and Sey1p (Stefano and Brandizzi, 2014). It contains not only an amphipathic region but also a Ser/Thr-rich C terminus.Arabidopsis has two RHD3 isoforms called RHD3-Like 1 and RHD3-Like 2. Fluorescently tagged RHD3 and RHD3-Like 2 localize to the ER (Chen et al., 2011; Stefano et al., 2012; Lee et al., 2013). RHD3 and the two RHD3-Like proteins likely have redundant roles in ER membrane fusion (Zhang et al., 2013). Overexpression of either RHD3 or RHD3-Like 2 with a defective GTPase domain phenocopies the aberrant ER morphology in rhd3-deficient mutants (Chen et al., 2011; Lee et al., 2013).In this study, we show that the Ser/Thr-rich C terminus enhances ER membrane fusion following phosphorylation of its C terminus. We propose a model in which phosphorylation and oligomerization of RHD3 is required for efficient ER membrane fusion. Our findings clarify the mechanisms that regulate RHD3 and consequently the homeostasis of membrane fusion in the ER.     

Focus on Ethylene: Ethylene and the Regulation of Physiological and Morphological Responses to Nutrient Deficiencies

To cope with nutrient deficiencies, plants develop both morphological and physiological responses. The regulation of these responses is not totally understood, but some hormones and signaling substances have been implicated. It was suggested several years ago that ethylene participates in the regulation of responses to iron and phosphorous deficiency. More recently, its role has been extended to other deficiencies, such as potassium, sulfur, and others. The role of ethylene in so many deficiencies suggests that, to confer specificity to the different responses, it should act through different transduction pathways and/or in conjunction with other signals. In this update, the data supporting a role for ethylene in the regulation of responses to different nutrient deficiencies will be reviewed. In addition, the results suggesting the action of ethylene through different transduction pathways and its interaction with other hormones and signaling substances will be discussed.When plants suffer from a mineral nutrient deficiency, they develop morphological and physiological responses (mainly in their roots) aimed to facilitate the uptake and mobilization of the limiting nutrient. After the nutrient has been acquired in enough quantity, these responses need to be switched off to avoid toxicity and conserve energy. In recent years, different plant hormones (e.g. ethylene, auxin, cytokinins, jasmonic acid, abscisic acid, brassinosteroids, GAs, and strigolactones) have been implicated in the regulation of these responses (Romera et al., 2007, 2011, 2015; Liu et al., 2009; Rubio et al., 2009; Kapulnik et al., 2011; Kiba et al., 2011; Iqbal et al., 2013; Zhang et al., 2014).Before the 1990s, there were several publications relating ethylene and nutrient deficiencies (cited in Lynch and Brown [1997] and Romera et al. [1999]) without establishing a direct implication of ethylene in the regulation of nutrient deficiency responses. In 1994, Romera and Alcántara (1994) published an article in Plant Physiology suggesting a role for ethylene in the regulation of Fe deficiency responses. In 1999, Borch et al. (1999) showed the participation of ethylene in the regulation of P deficiency responses. Since then, evidence has been accumulating in support of a role for ethylene in the regulation of both Fe (Romera et al., 1999, 2015; Waters and Blevins, 2000; Lucena et al., 2006; Waters et al., 2007; García et al., 2010, 2011, 2013, 2014; Yang et al., 2014) and P deficiency responses (Kim et al., 2008; Lei et al., 2011; Li et al., 2011; Nagarajan and Smith, 2012; Wang et al., 2012, 2014c). Both Fe and P may be poorly available in most soils, and plants develop similar responses under their deficiencies (Romera and Alcántara, 2004; Zhang et al., 2014). More recently, a role for ethylene has been extended to other deficiencies, such as K (Shin and Schachtman, 2004; Jung et al., 2009; Kim et al., 2012), S (Maruyama-Nakashita et al., 2006; Wawrzyńska et al., 2010; Moniuszko et al., 2013), and B (Martín-Rejano et al., 2011). Ethylene has also been implicated in both N deficiency and excess (Tian et al., 2009; Mohd-Radzman et al., 2013; Zheng et al., 2013), and its participation in Mg deficiency has been suggested (Hermans et al., 2010).In this update, we will review the information supporting a role for ethylene in the regulation of different nutrient deficiency responses. For information relating ethylene to other aspects of plant mineral nutrition, such as N₂ fixation and responses to excess of nitrate or essential heavy metals, the reader is referred to other reviews (for review, see Maksymiec, 2007; Mohd-Radzman et al., 2013; Steffens, 2014).