Timing the switch to phototrophic growth: A possible role of GUN1

In young Arabidopsis seedlings, retrograde signaling from plastids regulates the expression of photosynthesis-associated nuclear genes in response to the developmental and functional state of the chloroplasts. The chloroplast-located PPR protein GUN1 is required for signalling following disruption of plastid protein synthesis early in seedling development before full photosynthetic competence has been achieved. Recently we showed that sucrose repression and the correct temporal expression of LHCB1, encoding a light-harvesting chlorophyll protein associated with photosystem II, are perturbed in gun1 mutant seedlings.¹ Additionally, we demonstrated that in gun1 seedlings anthocyanin accumulation and the expression of the “early” anthocyanin-biosynthesis genes is perturbed. Early seedling development, predominantly at the stage of hypocotyl elongation and cotyledon expansion, is also affected in gun1 seedlings in response to sucrose, ABA and disruption of plastid protein synthesis by lincomycin. These findings indicate a central role for GUN1 in plastid, sucrose and ABA signalling in early seedling development.Key words: ABA, ABI4, anthocyanin, chloroplast, GUN1, retrograde signalling, sucroseArabidopsis seedlings develop in response to light and other environmental cues. In young seedlings, development is fuelled by mobilization of lipid reserves until chloroplast biogenesis is complete and the seedlings can make the transition to phototrophic growth. The majority of proteins with functions related to photosynthesis are encoded by the nuclear genome, and their expression is coordinated with the expression of genes in the chloroplast genome. In developing seedlings, retrograde signaling from chloroplasts to the nucleus regulates the expression of these nuclear genes and is dependent on the developmental and functional status of the chloroplast. Two classes of gun (genomes uncoupled) mutants defective in retrograde signalling have been identified in Arabidopsis: the first, which comprises gun2–gun5, involves mutations in genes encoding components of tetrapyrrole biosynthesis.^2,3 The other comprises gun1, which has mutations in a nuclear gene encoding a plastid-located pentatricopeptide repeat (PPR) protein with an SMR (small MutS-related) domain near the C-terminus.^4,5 PPR proteins are known to have roles in RNA processing⁶ and the SMR domain of GUN1 has been shown to bind DNA,⁴ but the specific functions of these domains in GUN1 are not yet established. However, GUN1 has been shown to be involved in plastid gene expression-dependent,⁷ redox,⁴ ABA1,⁴ and sucrose signaling,^1,4,8 as well as light quality and intensity sensing pathways.^9–11 In addition, GUN1 has been shown to influence anthocyanin biosynthesis, hypocotyl extension and cotyledon expansion.^1,11     

MOTHER OF FT AND TFL1 regulates seed germination and fertility relevant to the brassinosteroid signaling pathway

Brassinosteroids (BRs) are a family of plant steroid hormones that play diverse roles in many aspects of plant growth and development. For example, BRs promote seed germination by counteracting the inhibitory effect of ABA and regulate plant reproductive development, thus affecting seed yield. We have recently reported that MOTHER OF FT AND TFL1 (MFT) regulates seed germination through a negative feedback loop modulating ABA signaling in Arabidopsis. Here, we show that MFT function is also relevant to the BR signaling pathway. In mft loss-of-function mutants, the application of BR could not fully antagonize the inhibitory effect of exogenous ABA on seed germination, suggesting that BR promotes seed germination against ABA partly through MFT. In addition, mft enhances the low-fertility phenotype of det2 in which BR biosynthesis is blocked. This phenotype, together with the observation that MFT is expressed in gametophytes and developing seeds, suggests that MFT and BR play redundant roles in regulating fertility. Therefore, these results suggest that MFT affects seed germination and fertility relevant to the BR signaling pathway.Key words: Arabidopsis, brassinosteroid, abscisic acid, fertility, seed germinationPlant hormones exert profound effects on many fundamental processes during plant growth and development. With respect to seed development and germination, it has long been known that abscisic acid (ABA) and gibberellin (GA) are two major types of phytohormones that play antagonistic roles in regulating these events. Not until recently, another group of phytohormones, namely brassinosteroids (BRs), has also been found to counteract the inhibitory effect of ABA on seed germination.^1,2 In addition, BR has been suggested to act in parallel with GA to promote cell elongation and germination.^1,3,4BRs are a class of polyhydroxysteroids that are found in a wide variety of plant species.⁵ They can be detected in almost every plant tissue, with the highest abundance in the pollen and seeds.⁶ The most active component in the family of BRs is 24-epibrassinolide (BL), which is capable of activating BR signaling.⁶ In Arabidopsis, when the early steps of BR biosynthesis are blocked, the resulting defects include reduced male fertility under normal growth conditions^7,8 and decreased germination percentage in the presence of exogenous ABA.¹ Thus, BR plays an indispensible role in the control of seed development and also contributes to the regulation of seed germination.We have previously reported that MOTHER OF FT AND TFL1 (MFT) responds to both ABA and GA signals to regulate seed germination.⁹ Here we show that MFT functions in regulating seed germination and fertility, which is also relevant to the BR signaling pathway. Thus, MFT seems to function specifically in seeds in response to various phytohormones.     

Why have chloroplasts developed a unique motility system?

Organelle movement in plants is dependent on actin filaments with most of the organelles being transported along the actin cables by class XI myosins. Although chloroplast movement is also actin filament-dependent, a potential role of myosin motors in this process is poorly understood. Interestingly, chloroplasts can move in any direction and change the direction within short time periods, suggesting that chloroplasts use the newly formed actin filaments rather than preexisting actin cables. Furthermore, the data on myosin gene knockouts and knockdowns in Arabidopsis and tobacco do not support myosins'' XI role in chloroplast movement. Our recent studies revealed that chloroplast movement and positioning are mediated by the short actin filaments localized at chloroplast periphery (cp-actin filaments) rather than cytoplasmic actin cables. The accumulation of cp-actin filaments depends on kinesin-like proteins, KAC1 and KAC2, as well as on a chloroplast outer membrane protein CHUP1. We propose that plants evolved a myosin XI-independent mechanism of the actin-based chloroplast movement that is distinct from the mechanism used by other organelles.Key words: actin, Arabidopsis, blue light, kinesin, myosin, organelle movement, phototropinOrganelle movement and positioning are pivotal aspects of the intracellular dynamics in most eukaryotes. Although plants are sessile organisms, their organelles are quickly repositioned in response to fluctuating environmental conditions and certain endogenous signals. By and large, plant organelle movements and positioning are dependent on actin filaments, although microtubules play certain accessory roles in organelle dynamics.^1,2 Actin inhibitors effectively retard the movements of mitochondria,^3–6 peroxisomes,^5,7–11 Golgi stacks,^12,13 endoplasmic reticulum (ER),^14,15 and nuclei.^16–18 These organelles are co-aligned and associated with actin filaments.^{5,7,8,10–12,15,18} Recent progress in this field started to reveal the molecular motility system responsible for the organelle transport in plants.¹⁹Chloroplast movement is among the most fascinating models of organelle movement in plants because it is precisely controlled by ambient light conditions.^20,21 Weak light induces chloroplast accumulation response so that chloroplasts can capture photosynthetic light efficiently (Fig. 1A). Strong light induces chloroplast avoidance response to escape from photodamage (Fig. 1B).²² The blue light-induced chloroplast movement is mediated by the blue light receptor phototropin (phot). In some cryptogam plants, the red light-induced chloroplast movement is regulated by a chimeric phytochrome/phototropin photoreceptor neochrome.^23–25 In a model plant Arabidopsis, phot1 and phot2 function redundantly to regulate the accumulation response,²⁶ whereas phot2 alone is essential for the avoidance response.^27,28 Several additional factors regulating chloroplast movement were identified by analyses of Arabidopsis mutants deficient in chloroplast photorelocation.^29–32 In particular, identification of CHUP1 (chloroplast unusual positioning 1) revealed the connection between chloroplasts and actin filaments at the molecular level.²⁹ CHUP1 is a chloroplast outer membrane protein capable of interacting with F-actin, G-actin and profilin in vitro.^29,33,34 The chup1 mutant plants are defective in both the chloroplast movement and chloroplast anchorage to the plasma membrane,^22,29,33 suggesting that CHUP1 plays an important role in linking chloroplasts to the plasma membrane through the actin filaments. However, how chloroplasts move using the actin filaments and whether chloroplast movement utilizes the actin-based motility system similar to other organelle movements remained to be determined.Open in a separate windowFigure 1Schematic distribution patterns of chloroplasts in a palisade cell under different light conditions, weak (A) and strong (B) lights. Shown as a side view of mid-part of the cell and a top view with three different levels (i.e., top, middle and bottom of the cell). The cell was irradiated from the leaf surface shown as arrows. Weak light induces chloroplast accumulation response (A) and strong light induces the avoidance response (B).Here, we review the recent findings pointing to existence of a novel actin-based mechanisms for chloroplast movement and discuss the differences between the mechanism responsible for movement of chloroplasts and other organelles.     

Sublethal concentrations of salicylic acid decrease the formation of reactive oxygen species but maintain an increased nitric oxide production in the root apex of the ethylene-insensitive Never ripe tomato mutants

The pattern of salicylic acid (SA)-induced production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and nitric oxide (NO) were different in the apex of adventitious roots in wild-type and in the ethylene-insensitive Never ripe (Nr) mutants of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L. cv Ailsa Craig). ROS were upregulated, while NO remained at the control level in apical root tissues of wildtype plants exposed to sublethal concentrations of SA. In contrast, Nr plants expressing a defective ethylene receptor displayed a reduced level of ROS and a higher NO content in the apical root cells. In wild-type plants NO production seems to be ROS(H₂O₂)-dependent at cell death-inducing concentrations of SA, indicating that ROS and NO may interact to trigger oxidative cell death. In the absence of significant ROS accumulation, the increased NO production caused moderate reduction in cell viability in root apex of Nr plants exposed to 10⁻³ M SA. This suggests that a functional ethylene signaling pathway is necessary for the control of ROS and NO production induced by SA.Key words: ethylene receptor mutant, never ripe, nitric oxide, reactive oxygen species, root apex, salicylic acid, tomatoSeveral signal molecules, including salicylic acid (SA) have been implicated in the response of plants to biotic^1–3 and abiotic stressors.^4–6 SA was identified as a central regulator of local defense against (hemi)biotophic pathogens inducing a hypersensitive response (HR), which is characterized by the development of lesions that restrict pathogen spread. It has also emerged as a possible signaling component involved in the activation of certain plant defense responses in non-infected part of the plants establishing the systemic acquired resistance (SAR).⁷The SA-induced biotic and abiotic stress adaptation most likely involves reactive oxygen species (ROS) and nitric oxide (NO) in primary signaling events that activate multiple signal transduction pathways. SA-induced ROS is required for the activation of antioxidant defense mechanisms⁴ and if the generation of ROS exceeds the capacity of antioxidant systems, the cells die.⁸ NO is another important player that is required for the induction of defense mechanisms⁹ or for ROS-induced cell death.¹⁰Accumulation of SA, and two other plant hormones, ethylene (ET) and jasmonic acid (JA) are intimately associated with the initiation or spread of cell death. In HR SA and ROS have been proposed to be on a positive feedback loop that amplifies signals and leads to programmed cell death (PCD). Ethylene caused increased spreading of cell death, while lesion containment can be achieved by JA through decreasing the sensitivity of the cells to ethylene and through the suppression of SA biosynthesis and signaling.⁸Ethylene evolution is associated with diverse physiological processes such as leaf and flower senescence, abscission of organs and fruit ripening.¹¹ The biosynthesis of ethylene is stimulated by a variety of abiotic and biotic stress factors. Ethylene overproducing mutants (eto1 and eto3) of Arabidopsis were found to be more sensitive to O₃, an abiotic stressor which induces ROS-dependent cell death.¹² Cadmium-induced cell death was also accompanied by increased production of ethylene and simultaneously by H₂O₂ accumulation in tomato cell suspension, and based on the effect of specific inhibitors of ethylene biosynthesis and action the authors concluded that the cell death process required H₂O₂ production and a functional ethylene signaling pathway.¹³ Ethylene signaling is also required for the susceptible disease response of tomato plants infected with Xanthomonas campestris pv vesicatoria.¹⁴ It was found that the accumulation of SA and increased production of ethylene were important components of the disease symptoms of this pathogen in wild-type plants, while in Never ripe (Nr) mutants, which have a non-functional ethylene receptor, the infected plants failed to accumulate SA, produced less ethylene, and the leaves exhibited reduced necrotic lesions.It has been also shown that SA enhances NO synthesis in a dose-dependent manner.¹⁵ ROS, such as ^·O₂⁻ and H₂O₂ as well as NO can act together in the cell death regulation and propagation.^8,16 The compartment-specific (down)regulation of ROS can be controlled by NO, accordingly, ROS and NO homeostasis may be essential for the induction or for the avoidance of cell death.     

Hypoxia: A novel function for VIN3

VERNALIZATION INSENSITIVE 3 (VIN3) encodes a PHD domain chromatin remodelling protein that is induced in response to cold and is required for the establishment of the vernalization response in Arabidopsis thaliana.¹ Vernalization is the acquisition of the competence to flower after exposure to prolonged low temperatures, which in Arabidopsis is associated with the epigenetic repression of the floral repressor FLOWERING LOCUS C (FLC).^2,3 During vernalization VIN3 binds to the chromatin of the FLC locus,¹ and interacts with conserved components of Polycomb-group Repressive Complex 2 (PRC2).^4,5 This complex catalyses the tri-methylation of histone H3 lysine 27 (H3K27me3),^4,6,7 a repressive chromatin mark that increases at the FLC locus as a result of vernalization.^4,7–10 In our recent paper¹¹ we found that VIN3 is also induced by hypoxic conditions, and as is the case with low temperatures, induction occurs in a quantitative manner. Our experiments indicated that VIN3 is required for the survival of Arabidopsis seedlings exposed to low oxygen conditions. We suggested that the function of VIN3 during low oxygen conditions is likely to involve the mediation of chromatin modifications at certain loci that help the survival of Arabidopsis in response to prolonged hypoxia. Here we discuss the implications of our observations and hypotheses in terms of epigenetic mechanisms controlling gene regulation in response to hypoxia.Key words: arabidopsis, VIN3, FLC, hypoxia, vernalization, chromatin remodelling, survival     

Plant defensins: Defense,development and application

Plant defensins are small, highly stable, cysteine-rich peptides that constitute a part of the innate immune system primarily directed against fungal pathogens. Biological activities reported for plant defensins include antifungal activity, antibacterial activity, proteinase inhibitory activity and insect amylase inhibitory activity. Plant defensins have been shown to inhibit infectious diseases of humans and to induce apoptosis in a human pathogen. Transgenic plants overexpressing defensins are strongly resistant to fungal pathogens. Based on recent studies, some plant defensins are not merely toxic to microbes but also have roles in regulating plant growth and development.Key words: defensin, antifungal, antimicrobial peptide, development, innate immunityDefensins are diverse members of a large family of cationic host defence peptides (HDP), widely distributed throughout the plant and animal kingdoms.^1–3 Defensins and defensin-like peptides are functionally diverse, disrupting microbial membranes and acting as ligands for cellular recognition and signaling.⁴ In the early 1990s, the first members of the family of plant defensins were isolated from wheat and barley grains.^5,6 Those proteins were originally called γ-thionins because their size (∼5 kDa, 45 to 54 amino acids) and cysteine content (typically 4, 6 or 8 cysteine residues) were found to be similar to the thionins.⁷ Subsequent “γ-thionins” homologous proteins were indentified and cDNAs were cloned from various monocot or dicot seeds.⁸ Terras and his colleagues⁹ isolated two antifungal peptides, Rs-AFP1 and Rs-AFP2, noticed that the plant peptides'' structural and functional properties resemble those of insect and mammalian defensins, and therefore termed the family of peptides “plant defensins” in 1995. Sequences of more than 80 different plant defensin genes from different plant species were analyzed.¹⁰ A query of the UniProt database (www.uniprot.org/) currently reveals publications of 371 plant defensins available for review. The Arabidopsis genome alone contains more than 300 defensin-like (DEFL) peptides, 78% of which have a cysteine-stabilized α-helix β-sheet (CSαβ) motif common to plant and invertebrate defensins.¹¹ In addition, over 1,000 DEFL genes have been identified from plant EST projects.¹²Unlike the insect and mammalian defensins, which are mainly active against bacteria,^2,3,10,13 plant defensins, with a few exceptions, do not have antibacterial activity.¹⁴ Most plant defensins are involved in defense against a broad range of fungi.^2,3,10,15 They are not only active against phytopathogenic fungi (such as Fusarium culmorum and Botrytis cinerea), but also against baker''s yeast and human pathogenic fungi (such as Candida albicans).² Plant defensins have also been shown to inhibit the growth of roots and root hairs in Arabidopsis thaliana¹⁶ and alter growth of various tomato organs which can assume multiple functions related to defense and development.⁴