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.     

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.     

SWEET17, a Facilitative Transporter,Mediates Fructose Transport across the Tonoplast of Arabidopsis Roots and Leaves

Fructose (Fru) is a major storage form of sugars found in vacuoles, yet the molecular regulation of vacuolar Fru transport is poorly studied. Although SWEET17 (for SUGARS WILL EVENTUALLY BE EXPORTED TRANSPORTERS17) has been characterized as a vacuolar Fru exporter in leaves, its expression in leaves is low. Here, RNA analysis and SWEET17-β-glucuronidase/-GREEN FLUORESCENT PROTEIN fusions expressed in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) reveal that SWEET17 is highly expressed in the cortex of roots and localizes to the tonoplast of root cells. Expression of SWEET17 in roots was inducible by Fru and darkness, treatments that activate accumulation and release of vacuolar Fru, respectively. Mutation and ectopic expression of SWEET17 led to increased and decreased root growth in the presence of Fru, respectively. Overexpression of SWEET17 specifically reduced the Fru content in leaves by 80% during cold stress. These results intimate that SWEET17 functions as a Fru-specific uniporter on the root tonoplast. Vacuoles overexpressing SWEET17 showed increased [¹⁴C]Fru uptake compared with the wild type. SWEET17-mediated Fru uptake was insensitive to ATP or treatment with NH₄Cl or carbonyl cyanide m-chlorophenyl hydrazone, indicating that SWEET17 functions as an energy-independent facilitative carrier. The Arabidopsis genome contains a close paralog of SWEET17 in clade IV, SWEET16. The predominant expression of SWEET16 in root vacuoles and reduced root growth of mutants under Fru excess indicate that SWEET16 also functions as a vacuolar transporter in roots. We propose that in addition to a role in leaves, SWEET17 plays a key role in facilitating bidirectional Fru transport across the tonoplast of roots in response to metabolic demand to maintain cytosolic Fru homeostasis.Sugars are main energy sources for generating ATP, major precursors to various storage carbohydrates as well as key signaling molecules important for normal growth in higher plants (Rolland et al., 2006). Depending on the metabolic demand, sugars are translocated over long distances or stored locally. SWEET (for SUGARS WILL EVENTUALLY BE EXPORTED TRANSPORTERS) and SUC/SUT (for Sucrose transporter/Sugar transporter)-type transporters are responsible for transfer of Suc from the phloem parenchyma into the sieve element companion cell complex for long-distance translocation (Riesmeier et al., 1992; Sauer, 2007; Kühn and Grof, 2010; Chen et al., 2012). Suc or hexoses derived from Suc hydrolysis in the cell wall are then taken up into sink cells by SUT (Braun and Slewinski, 2009) or monosaccharide transporters, such as sugar transporter1 (Sauer et al., 1990; Pego and Smeekens, 2000; Sherson et al., 2003). Alternatively, sugars are thought to move between cells via plasmodesmata (Voitsekhovskaja et al., 2006; Ayre, 2011). Major sugar storage pools within plant cells are soluble sugars stored in the vacuole, starch in plastids, and lipids in oil bodies.Vacuoles, which can account for approximately 90% of the cell volume (Winter et al., 1993), play central roles in temporary and long-term storage of soluble sugars (Martinoia et al., 2007; Etxeberria et al., 2012). Some agriculturally important crops such as sugar beet (Beta vulgaris; Leigh, 1984; Getz and Klein, 1995), citrus (Citrus spp.; Echeverria and Valich, 1988), sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum; Thom et al., 1982), and carrot (Daucus carota; Keller, 1988) can store considerable amounts (>10% of plant dry weight) of Suc, Glc, or Fru in vacuoles of the storage parenchyma. Due to a high capacity of vacuoles for storing sugars, vacuolar sugars can serve as an important carbohydrate source during energy starvation, e.g. after starch has been exhausted (Echeverria and Valich, 1988), as well as for the production of other compounds (e.g. osmoprotectants). Sugars are known to regulate photosynthesis; therefore, the release of sugars from vacuoles could be important for modulating photosynthesis (Kaiser and Heber, 1984). Moreover, vacuole-derived sugars are commercially used to produce biofuels, such as ethanol, from sugarcane. Knowledge of the key transporters involved in sugar exchange between the vacuole and cytoplasm is thus relevant in the context of bioenergy (Grennan and Gragg, 2009).To facilitate the exchange of sugars across the tonoplast, plant vacuoles are equipped with a multitude of transporters (Neuhaus, 2007; Etxeberria et al., 2012; Martinoia et al., 2012) comprising both facilitated diffusion and active transport systems of vacuolar sugars (Martinoia et al., 2000). Typically, Suc is actively imported into vacuoles by tonoplast monosaccharide transporter (AtTMT1/AtTMT2; Schulz et al., 2011) and exported by the SUT4 family (AtSUC4, OsSUT2; Eom et al., 2011; Payyavula et al., 2011; Schulz et al., 2011). Two H⁺-dependent sugar antiporters, the vacuolar Glc transporter (AtVGT1; Aluri and Büttner, 2007) and AtTMT1 (Wormit et al., 2006), mediate Glc uptake across the tonoplast to promote carbohydrate accumulation in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana). The Early Responsive to Dehydration-Like6 protein has been shown to export vacuolar Glc into the cytosol (Poschet et al., 2011), likely via an energy-independent diffusion mechanism (Yamada et al., 2010). Defects in these vacuolar sugar transporters alter carbohydrate partitioning and allocation and inhibit plant growth and seed yield (Aluri and Büttner, 2007; Wingenter et al., 2010; Eom et al., 2011; Poschet et al., 2011).In contrast to numerous studies on vacuolar transport of Suc and Glc, limited efforts have been devoted to the molecular mechanism of vacuolar Fru transport even though Fru is predominantly located in vacuoles (Martinoia et al., 1987; Voitsekhovskaja et al., 2006; Tohge et al., 2011). Vacuolar Fru is important for the regulation of turgor pressure (Pontis, 1989), antioxidative defense (Bogdanović et al., 2008), and signal transduction during early seedling development (Cho and Yoo, 2011; Li et al., 2011). Thus, control of Fru transport across the tonoplast is thought to be important for plant growth and development. One vacuolar Glc transporter from the Arabidopsis monosaccharide transporter family, VGT1, has been reported to mediate low-affinity Fru uptake when expressed in yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) vacuoles (Aluri and Büttner, 2007). Yet, the high vacuolar uptake activity to Fru intimates the existence of additional high-capacity Fru-specific vacuolar transporters (Thom et al., 1982). Recently, quantitative mapping of a quantitative trait locus for Fru content of leaves led to the identification of the Fru-specific vacuolar transporter SWEET17 (Chardon et al., 2013).SWEET17 belongs to the recently identified SWEET (PFAM:PF03083) super family, which contains 17 members in Arabidopsis and 21 in rice (Oryza sativa; Chen et al., 2010; Frommer et al., 2013; Xuan et al., 2013). Based on homology with 27% to 80% amino acid identity, plant SWEET proteins were grouped into four subclades (Chen et al., 2010). Analysis of GFP fusions indicated that most SWEET transporters are plasma membrane localized. Transport assays using radiotracers in Xenopus laevis oocytes and sugar nanosensors in mammalian cells showed that they function as largely pH-independent low-affinity uniporters with both uptake and efflux activity (Chen et al., 2010, 2012). In particular, clade I and II SWEETs transport monosaccharides and clade III SWEETs transport disaccharides, mainly Suc (Chen et al., 2010, 2012). Mutant phenotypes and developmental expression of several SWEET transporters support important roles in sugar translocation between organs. The clade III SWEETs, in particular SWEET11 and 12, mediate the key step of Suc efflux from phloem parenchyma cells for phloem translocation (Chen et al., 2012). Moreover, SWEETs are coopted by pathogens, likely to provide energy resources and carbon at the site of infection (Chen et al., 2010). Mutations of SWEET8/Ruptured pollen grain1 in Arabidopsis, and RNA inhibition of OsSWEET11 (also called Os8N3 or Xa13) in rice, and petunia (Petunia hybrida) NEC1 resulted in male sterility (Ge et al., 2001; Yang et al., 2006; Guan et al., 2008), possibly caused by inhibiting the Glc supply to developing pollen (Guan et al., 2008). Interestingly, two members, SWEET16 and SWEET17, of the family localize to the tonoplast (Chardon et al., 2013; Klemens et al., 2013). Allelic variation or mutations that affect SWEET17 expression caused Fru accumulation in Arabidopsis leaves, indicating that it plays a key role in exporting Fru from leaf vacuoles (Chardon et al., 2013). A more recent study demonstrated that SWEET16 also functions as a vacuolar sugar transporter (Klemens et al., 2013). Surprisingly, however, SWEET17 expression in mature leaves was comparatively low (Chardon et al., 2013), which leads us to ask whether SWEET17 could mainly function in other tissues under specific developmental or environmental conditions. Although Arabidopsis SWEET17 has been shown to transport Fru in a heterologous system where it accumulated in part at the plasma membrane (Chardon et al., 2013), the biochemical properties of SWEET17 were still elusive. SWEET16 and SWEET17 from Arabidopsis belong to the clade IV SWEETs. Whether clade IV proteins both transport vacuolar sugars in planta deserves further studies.Here, we used GUS/GFP fusions to reveal the root-dominant expression and vacuolar localization of the SWEET17 protein in vivo and its regulation by Fru levels. Phenotypes of mutants and overexpressors were consistent with a role of SWEET17 in bidirectional Fru transport across root vacuoles. The uniport feature of SWEET17 transport was further confirmed using isolated mesophyll vacuoles. Similarly, SWEET16 is also shown to function in vacuolar sugar transport in roots. Our work, performed in parallel to the two other studies (Chardon et al., 2013; Klemens et al., 2013), provides direct evidence for Fru uniport by SWEET17 and presents functional analyses to uncover important roles of these vacuolar transporters in maintaining intracellular Fru homeostasis in roots.     

Homomeric Interaction of AtVSR1 Is Essential for Its Function as a Vacuolar Sorting Receptor

Vacuolar sorting receptors, BP80/VSRs, play a critical role in vacuolar trafficking of soluble proteins in plant cells. However, the mechanism of action of BP80 is not well understood. Here, we investigate the action mechanism of AtVSR1, a member of BP80 proteins in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), in vacuolar trafficking. AtVSR1 exists as multiple forms, including a high molecular mass homomeric complex in vivo. Both the transmembrane and carboxyl-terminal cytoplasmic domains of AtVSR1 are necessary for the homomeric interaction. The carboxyl-terminal cytoplasmic domain contains specific sequence information, whereas the transmembrane domain has a structural role in the homomeric interaction. In protoplasts, an AtVSR1 mutant, C2A, that contained alanine substitution of the region involved in the homomeric interaction, was defective in trafficking to the prevacuolar compartment and localized primarily to the trans-Golgi network. In addition, overexpression of C2A, but not wild-type AtVSR1, inhibited trafficking of soluble proteins to the vacuole and caused their secretion into the medium. Furthermore, C2A:hemagglutinin in transgenic plants interfered with the homomeric interaction of endogenous AtVSR1 and inhibited vacuolar trafficking of sporamin:green fluorescent protein. These data suggest that homomeric interaction of AtVSR1 is critical for its function as a vacuolar sorting receptor.Newly synthesized organellar proteins are delivered to their respective organelles by a complex mechanism of transport. Vacuolar or secretory proteins are initially sorted and translocated into the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) cotranslationally (Crowley et al., 1994; Rapoport et al., 1996). After correct folding into a mature protein and assembly into complexes in the ER, these proteins are transported to the Golgi complex by COPII vesicles (Lee et al., 2004; Tang et al., 2005). Proteins that arrive nondiscriminantly to the Golgi complex are subject to sorting primarily at the trans-Golgi network (TGN), and depending on their final destination, they are transported to the prelysosomal or prevacuolar compartment (PVC; Harasaki et al., 2005; Traub, 2005). Lysosomal/vacuolar cargo-sorting receptors play a critical role in the sorting of cargoes at this step (Marcusson et al., 1994; Hadlington and Denecke, 2000; Gu et al., 2001; Tse et al., 2009).In plant cells, the search for vacuolar sorting receptors led to the identification of an 80-kD protein called BP80 (Kirsch et al., 1994, 1996; Paris and Neuhaus, 2002). BP80 is a type I membrane protein and a member of a highly conserved family of proteins in plants termed vacuolar sorting receptors (VSRs; Kirsch et al., 1994, 1996; Ahmed et al., 1997). BP80/VSRs localize primarily to the PVC, with a minor portion located in the TGN (Sanderfoot et al., 1998; Li et al., 2002; Tse et al., 2004). Thus, it has been proposed that BP80/VSRs shuttle between the PVC and the TGN. In the TGN, they are involved in sorting of vacuolar proteins containing a vacuolar sorting motif, NPIR, for packaging into clathrin-coated vesicles (CCVs). In support of this theory, it was shown that in vitro, BP80/VSR binds to the N-terminal propeptide-sorting signal, the NPIR motif (Kirsch et al., 1994, 1996; Ahmed et al., 1997, 2000). In addition, overexpression of the ER-localized luminal domain of PV72, a seed-specific vacuolar sorting receptor, interferes with the transport of an NPIR-containing proteinase in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) leaves (Watanabe et al., 2004). The biological role of BP80/VSRs was demonstrated in protoplasts. Expression of a mutant form of BP80/VSR, in which the luminal domain was replaced with GFP, resulted in secretion of a soluble vacuolar protein, indicating that BP80/VSR functions in protein trafficking to the lytic vacuole (daSilva et al., 2005). In addition, recently it has been demonstrated that AtVSR1 plays a role in trafficking of protein storage vacuoles in plant seed cells (Shimada et al., 2003). In the atvsr1 mutant, storage proteins were secreted into the apoplastic space of Arabidopsis seeds. In this case, the sorting signal recognized by AtVSR1 may be different from the NPIR motif found in proteins destined to the central vacuole.Although there is mounting evidence that BP80/VSR functions as a vacuolar sorting receptor in plant cells (daSilva et al., 2005; Oliviusson et al., 2006), the detailed mechanism of its action remains poorly understood. Man-6-P receptors and Vps10p, the sorting receptors for soluble lysosomal and vacuolar hydrolases in animal and yeast, respectively, recruit adaptor proteins such as adaptor protein complex 1 (AP-1) and Golgi-localized, γ-ear-containing Arf-binding proteins using the C-terminal cytoplasmic domain (CCD; Johnson and Kornfeld, 1992; Dintzis et al., 1994; Honing et al., 1997; Seaman et al., 1997; Nothwehr et al., 2000; Puertollano et al., 2001; Dennes et al., 2002; Doray et al., 2002; Nakatsu and Ohno, 2003). Similarly, the CCD of BP80/VSR may also recruit accessory proteins for CCV formation at the TGN. Indeed, AtVSR1 interacts with EpsinR1 (formally EPSIN1), one of the epsin homologs in Arabidopsis (Song et al., 2006). Since EpsinR1 interacts with clathrin directly, this interaction may play a role in CCV formation. In addition, the CCD of BP80 contains a highly conserved sequence motif, YMPL, which conforms to the consensus sequence motif YXXΦ (where X is any amino acid and Φ is an amino acid with a bulky hydrophobic side chain) for binding to AP complexes. A peptide containing the YMPL motif binds in vitro to Arabidopsis μA, a close homolog of AP μ-adaptin in animal cells. The importance of the YXXΦ motif has also been confirmed by a recent study showing that mutation of the YXXΦ motif of BP80 caused its mistargeting in tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) cells (daSilva et al., 2006). However, the exact role of the YXXΦ motif has not been addressed in trafficking of vacuolar proteins in vivo.In an effort to understand the action mechanism of BP80/VSRs in plant cells, we examined the interaction of AtVSR1 with its binding partners. Here, we demonstrate that AtVSR1 undergoes homomeric interaction through the transmembrane domain (TMD) and CCD and that the homomeric interaction is critical for its function as sorting receptor of vacuolar proteins.     

Patterns of Metabolite Changes Identified from Large-Scale Gene Perturbations in Arabidopsis Using a Genome-Scale Metabolic Network

Metabolomics enables quantitative evaluation of metabolic changes caused by genetic or environmental perturbations. However, little is known about how perturbing a single gene changes the metabolic system as a whole and which network and functional properties are involved in this response. To answer this question, we investigated the metabolite profiles from 136 mutants with single gene perturbations of functionally diverse Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) genes. Fewer than 10 metabolites were changed significantly relative to the wild type in most of the mutants, indicating that the metabolic network was robust to perturbations of single metabolic genes. These changed metabolites were closer to each other in a genome-scale metabolic network than expected by chance, supporting the notion that the genetic perturbations changed the network more locally than globally. Surprisingly, the changed metabolites were close to the perturbed reactions in only 30% of the mutants of the well-characterized genes. To determine the factors that contributed to the distance between the observed metabolic changes and the perturbation site in the network, we examined nine network and functional properties of the perturbed genes. Only the isozyme number affected the distance between the perturbed reactions and changed metabolites. This study revealed patterns of metabolic changes from large-scale gene perturbations and relationships between characteristics of the perturbed genes and metabolic changes.Rational and quantitative assessment of metabolic changes in response to genetic modification (GM) is an open question and in need of innovative solutions. Nontargeted metabolite profiling can detect thousands of compounds, but it is not easy to understand the significance of the changed metabolites in the biochemical and biological context of the organism. To better assess the changes in metabolites from nontargeted metabolomics studies, it is important to examine the changed metabolites in the context of the genome-scale metabolic network of the organism.Metabolomics is a technique that aims to quantify all the metabolites in a biological system (Nikolau and Wurtele, 2007; Nicholson and Lindon, 2008; Roessner and Bowne, 2009). It has been used widely in studies ranging from disease diagnosis (Holmes et al., 2008; DeBerardinis and Thompson, 2012) and drug discovery (Cascante et al., 2002; Kell, 2006) to metabolic reconstruction (Feist et al., 2009; Kim et al., 2012) and metabolic engineering (Keasling, 2010; Lee et al., 2011). Metabolomic studies have demonstrated the possibility of identifying gene functions from changes in the relative concentrations of metabolites (metabotypes or metabolic signatures; Ebbels et al., 2004) in various species including yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae; Raamsdonk et al., 2001; Allen et al., 2003), Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana; Brotman et al., 2011), tomato (Solanum lycopersicum; Schauer et al., 2006), and maize (Zea mays; Riedelsheimer et al., 2012). Metabolomics has also been used to better understand how plants interact with their environments (Field and Lake, 2011), including their responses to biotic and abiotic stresses (Dixon et al., 2006; Arbona et al., 2013), and to predict important agronomic traits (Riedelsheimer et al., 2012). Metabolite profiling has been performed on many plant species, including angiosperms such as Arabidopsis, poplar (Populus trichocarpa), and Catharanthus roseus (Sumner et al., 2003; Rischer et al., 2006), basal land plants such as Selaginella moellendorffii and Physcomitrella patens (Erxleben et al., 2012; Yobi et al., 2012), and Chlamydomonas reinhardtii (Fernie et al., 2012; Davis et al., 2013). With the availability of whole genome sequences of various species, metabolomics has the potential to become a useful tool for elucidating the functions of genes using large-scale systematic analyses (Fiehn et al., 2000; Saito and Matsuda, 2010; Hur et al., 2013).Although metabolomics data have the potential for identifying the roles of genes that are associated with metabolic phenotypes, the biochemical mechanisms that link functions of genes with metabolic phenotypes are still poorly characterized. For example, we do not yet know the principles behind how perturbing the expression of a single gene changes the metabolic system as a whole. Large-scale metabolomics data have provided useful resources for linking phenotypes to genotypes (Fiehn et al., 2000; Roessner et al., 2001; Tikunov et al., 2005; Schauer et al., 2006; Lu et al., 2011; Fukushima et al., 2014). For example, Lu et al. (2011) compared morphological and metabolic phenotypes from more than 5,000 Arabidopsis chloroplast mutants using gas chromatography (GC)- and liquid chromatography (LC)-mass spectrometry (MS). Fukushima et al. (2014) generated metabolite profiles from various characterized and uncharacterized mutant plants and clustered the mutants with similar metabolic phenotypes by conducting multidimensional scaling with quantified metabolic phenotypes. Nonetheless, representation and analysis of such a large amount of data remains a challenge for scientific discovery (Lu et al., 2011). In addition, these studies do not examine the topological and functional characteristics of metabolic changes in the context of a genome-scale metabolic network. To understand the relationship between genotype and metabolic phenotype, we need to investigate the metabolic changes caused by perturbing the expression of a gene in a genome-scale metabolic network perspective, because metabolic pathways are not independent biochemical factories but are components of a complex network (Berg et al., 2002; Merico et al., 2009).Much progress has been made in the last 2 decades to represent metabolism at a genome scale (Terzer et al., 2009). The advances in genome sequencing and emerging fields such as biocuration and bioinformatics enabled the representation of genome-scale metabolic network reconstructions for model organisms (Bassel et al., 2012). Genome-scale metabolic models have been built and applied broadly from microbes to plants. The first step toward modeling a genome-scale metabolism in a plant species started with developing a genome-scale metabolic pathway database for Arabidopsis (AraCyc; Mueller et al., 2003) from reference pathway databases (Kanehisa and Goto, 2000; Karp et al., 2002; Zhang et al., 2010). Genome-scale metabolic pathway databases have been built for several plant species (Mueller et al., 2005; Zhang et al., 2005, 2010; Urbanczyk-Wochniak and Sumner, 2007; May et al., 2009; Dharmawardhana et al., 2013; Monaco et al., 2013, 2014; Van Moerkercke et al., 2013; Chae et al., 2014; Jung et al., 2014). Efforts have been made to develop predictive genome-scale metabolic models using enzyme kinetics and stoichiometric flux-balance approaches (Sweetlove et al., 2008). de Oliveira Dal’Molin et al. (2010) developed a genome-scale metabolic model for Arabidopsis and successfully validated the model by predicting the classical photorespiratory cycle as well as known key differences between redox metabolism in photosynthetic and nonphotosynthetic plant cells. Other genome-scale models have been developed for Arabidopsis (Poolman et al., 2009; Radrich et al., 2010; Mintz-Oron et al., 2012), C. reinhardtii (Chang et al., 2011; Dal’Molin et al., 2011), maize (Dal’Molin et al., 2010; Saha et al., 2011), sorghum (Sorghum bicolor; Dal’Molin et al., 2010), and sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum; Dal’Molin et al., 2010). These predictive models have the potential to be applied broadly in fields such as metabolic engineering, drug target discovery, identification of gene function, study of evolutionary processes, risk assessment of genetically modified crops, and interpretations of mutant phenotypes (Feist and Palsson, 2008; Ricroch et al., 2011).Here, we interrogate the metabotypes caused by 136 single gene perturbations of Arabidopsis by analyzing the relative concentration changes of 1,348 chemically identified metabolites using a reconstructed genome-scale metabolic network. We examine the characteristics of the changed metabolites (the metabolites whose relative concentrations were significantly different in mutants relative to the wild type) in the metabolic network to uncover biological and topological consequences of the perturbed genes.     

Nontransgenic Genome Modification in Plant Cells

Zinc finger nucleases (ZFNs) are a powerful tool for genome editing in eukaryotic cells. ZFNs have been used for targeted mutagenesis in model and crop species. In animal and human cells, transient ZFN expression is often achieved by direct gene transfer into the target cells. Stable transformation, however, is the preferred method for gene expression in plant species, and ZFN-expressing transgenic plants have been used for recovery of mutants that are likely to be classified as transgenic due to the use of direct gene-transfer methods into the target cells. Here we present an alternative, nontransgenic approach for ZFN delivery and production of mutant plants using a novel Tobacco rattle virus (TRV)-based expression system for indirect transient delivery of ZFNs into a variety of tissues and cells of intact plants. TRV systemically infected its hosts and virus ZFN-mediated targeted mutagenesis could be clearly observed in newly developed infected tissues as measured by activation of a mutated reporter transgene in tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) and petunia (Petunia hybrida) plants. The ability of TRV to move to developing buds and regenerating tissues enabled recovery of mutated tobacco and petunia plants. Sequence analysis and transmission of the mutations to the next generation confirmed the stability of the ZFN-induced genetic changes. Because TRV is an RNA virus that can infect a wide range of plant species, it provides a viable alternative to the production of ZFN-mediated mutants while avoiding the use of direct plant-transformation methods.Methods for genome editing in plant cells have fallen behind the remarkable progress made in whole-genome sequencing projects. The availability of reliable and efficient methods for genome editing would foster gene discovery and functional gene analyses in model plants and the introduction of novel traits in agriculturally important species (Puchta, 2002; Hanin and Paszkowski, 2003; Reiss, 2003; Porteus, 2009). Genome editing in various species is typically achieved by integrating foreign DNA molecules into the target genome by homologous recombination (HR). Genome editing by HR is routine in yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) cells (Scherer and Davis, 1979) and has been adapted for other species, including Drosophila, human cell lines, various fungal species, and mouse embryonic stem cells (Baribault and Kemler, 1989; Venken and Bellen, 2005; Porteus, 2007; Hall et al., 2009; Laible and Alonso-González, 2009; Tenzen et al., 2009). In plants, however, foreign DNA molecules, which are typically delivered by direct gene-transfer methods (e.g. Agrobacterium and microbombardment of plasmid DNA), often integrate into the target cell genome via nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ) and not HR (Ray and Langer, 2002; Britt and May, 2003).Various methods have been developed to indentify and select for rare site-specific foreign DNA integration events or to enhance the rate of HR-mediated DNA integration in plant cells. Novel T-DNA molecules designed to support strong positive- and negative-selection schemes (e.g. Thykjaer et al., 1997; Terada et al., 2002), altering the plant DNA-repair machinery by expressing yeast chromatin remodeling protein (Shaked et al., 2005), and PCR screening of large numbers of transgenic plants (Kempin et al., 1997; Hanin et al., 2001) are just a few of the experimental approaches used to achieve HR-mediated gene targeting in plant species. While successful, these approaches, and others, have resulted in only a limited number of reports describing the successful implementation of HR-mediated gene targeting of native and transgenic sequences in plant cells (for review, see Puchta, 2002; Hanin and Paszkowski, 2003; Reiss, 2003; Porteus, 2009; Weinthal et al., 2010).HR-mediated gene targeting can potentially be enhanced by the induction of genomic double-strand breaks (DSBs). In their pioneering studies, Puchta et al. (1993, 1996) showed that DSB induction by the naturally occurring rare-cutting restriction enzyme I-SceI leads to enhanced HR-mediated DNA repair in plants. Expression of I-SceI and another rare-cutting restriction enzyme (I-CeuI) also led to efficient NHEJ-mediated site-specific mutagenesis and integration of foreign DNA molecules in plants (Salomon and Puchta, 1998; Chilton and Que, 2003; Tzfira et al., 2003). Naturally occurring rare-cutting restriction enzymes thus hold great promise as a tool for genome editing in plant cells (Carroll, 2004; Pâques and Duchateau, 2007). However, their wide application is hindered by the tedious and next to impossible reengineering of such enzymes for novel DNA-target specificities (Pâques and Duchateau, 2007).A viable alternative to the use of rare-cutting restriction enzymes is the zinc finger nucleases (ZFNs), which have been used for genome editing in a wide range of eukaryotic species, including plants (e.g. Bibikova et al., 2001; Porteus and Baltimore, 2003; Lloyd et al., 2005; Urnov et al., 2005; Wright et al., 2005; Beumer et al., 2006; Moehle et al., 2007; Santiago et al., 2008; Shukla et al., 2009; Tovkach et al., 2009; Townsend et al., 2009; Osakabe et al., 2010; Petolino et al., 2010; Zhang et al., 2010). Here too, ZFNs have been used to enhance DNA integration via HR (e.g. Shukla et al., 2009; Townsend et al., 2009) and as an efficient tool for the induction of site-specific mutagenesis (e.g. Lloyd et al., 2005; Zhang et al., 2010) in plant species. The latter is more efficient and simpler to implement in plants as it does not require codelivery of both ZFN-expressing and donor DNA molecules and it relies on NHEJ—the dominant DNA-repair machinery in most plant species (Ray and Langer, 2002; Britt and May, 2003).ZFNs are artificial restriction enzymes composed of a fusion between an artificial Cys₂His₂ zinc-finger protein DNA-binding domain and the cleavage domain of the FokI endonuclease. The DNA-binding domain of ZFNs can be engineered to recognize a variety of DNA sequences (for review, see Durai et al., 2005; Porteus and Carroll, 2005; Carroll et al., 2006). The FokI endonuclease domain functions as a dimer, and digestion of the target DNA requires proper alignment of two ZFN monomers at the target site (Durai et al., 2005; Porteus and Carroll, 2005; Carroll et al., 2006). Efficient and coordinated expression of both monomers is thus required for the production of DSBs in living cells. Transient ZFN expression, by direct gene delivery, is the method of choice for targeted mutagenesis in human and animal cells (e.g. Urnov et al., 2005; Beumer et al., 2006; Meng et al., 2008). Among the different methods used for high and efficient transient ZFN delivery in animal and human cell lines are plasmid injection (Morton et al., 2006; Foley et al., 2009), direct plasmid transfer (Urnov et al., 2005), the use of integrase-defective lentiviral vectors (Lombardo et al., 2007), and mRNA injection (Takasu et al., 2010).In plant species, however, efficient and strong gene expression is often achieved by stable gene transformation. Both transient and stable ZFN expression have been used in gene-targeting experiments in plants (Lloyd et al., 2005; Wright et al., 2005; Maeder et al., 2008; Cai et al., 2009; de Pater et al., 2009; Shukla et al., 2009; Tovkach et al., 2009; Townsend et al., 2009; Osakabe et al., 2010; Petolino et al., 2010; Zhang et al., 2010). In all cases, direct gene-transformation methods, using polyethylene glycol, silicon carbide whiskers, or Agrobacterium, were deployed. Thus, while mutant plants and tissues could be recovered, potentially without any detectable traces of foreign DNA, such plants were generated using a transgenic approach and are therefore still likely to be classified as transgenic. Furthermore, the recovery of mutants in many cases is also dependent on the ability to regenerate plants from protoplasts, a procedure that has only been successfully applied in a limited number of plant species. Therefore, while ZFN technology is a powerful tool for site-specific mutagenesis, its wider implementation for plant improvement may be somewhat limited, both by its restriction to certain plant species and by legislative restrictions imposed on transgenic plants.Here we describe an alternative to direct gene transfer for ZFN delivery and for the production of mutated plants. Our approach is based on the use of a novel Tobacco rattle virus (TRV)-based expression system, which is capable of systemically infecting its host and spreading into a variety of tissues and cells of intact plants, including developing buds and regenerating tissues. We traced the indirect ZFN delivery in infected plants by activation of a mutated reporter gene and we demonstrate that this approach can be used to recover mutated plants.