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.     

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

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

Focus Issue on Calcium Signaling: Identification of Cyclic GMP-Activated Nonselective Ca2+-Permeable Cation Channels and Associated CNGC5 and CNGC6 Genes in Arabidopsis Guard Cells

Cytosolic Ca²⁺ in guard cells plays an important role in stomatal movement responses to environmental stimuli. These cytosolic Ca²⁺ increases result from Ca²⁺ influx through Ca²⁺-permeable channels in the plasma membrane and Ca²⁺ release from intracellular organelles in guard cells. However, the genes encoding defined plasma membrane Ca²⁺-permeable channel activity remain unknown in guard cells and, with some exceptions, largely unknown in higher plant cells. Here, we report the identification of two Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) cation channel genes, CNGC5 and CNGC6, that are highly expressed in guard cells. Cytosolic application of cyclic GMP (cGMP) and extracellularly applied membrane-permeable 8-Bromoguanosine 3′,5′-cyclic monophosphate-cGMP both activated hyperpolarization-induced inward-conducting currents in wild-type guard cells using Mg²⁺ as the main charge carrier. The cGMP-activated currents were strongly blocked by lanthanum and gadolinium and also conducted Ba²⁺, Ca²⁺, and Na⁺ ions. cngc5 cngc6 double mutant guard cells exhibited dramatically impaired cGMP-activated currents. In contrast, mutations in CNGC1, CNGC2, and CNGC20 did not disrupt these cGMP-activated currents. The yellow fluorescent protein-CNGC5 and yellow fluorescent protein-CNGC6 proteins localize in the cell periphery. Cyclic AMP activated modest inward currents in both wild-type and cngc5cngc6 mutant guard cells. Moreover, cngc5 cngc6 double mutant guard cells exhibited functional abscisic acid (ABA)-activated hyperpolarization-dependent Ca²⁺-permeable cation channel currents, intact ABA-induced stomatal closing responses, and whole-plant stomatal conductance responses to darkness and changes in CO₂ concentration. Furthermore, cGMP-activated currents remained intact in the growth controlled by abscisic acid2 and abscisic acid insensitive1 mutants. This research demonstrates that the CNGC5 and CNGC6 genes encode unique cGMP-activated nonselective Ca²⁺-permeable cation channels in the plasma membrane of Arabidopsis guard cells.Plants lose water via transpiration and take in CO₂ for photosynthesis through stomatal pores. Each stomatal pore is surrounded by two guard cells, and stomatal movements are driven by the change of turgor pressure in guard cells. The intracellular second messenger Ca²⁺ functions in guard cell signal transduction (Schroeder and Hagiwara, 1989; McAinsh et al., 1990; Webb et al., 1996; Grabov and Blatt, 1998; Allen et al., 1999; MacRobbie, 2000; Mori et al., 2006; Young et al., 2006; Siegel et al., 2009; Chen et al., 2010; Hubbard et al., 2012). Plasma membrane ion channel activity and gene expression in guard cells are finely regulated by the intracellular free calcium concentration ([Ca2+]_cyt; Schroeder and Hagiwara, 1989; Webb et al., 2001; Allen et al., 2002; Siegel et al., 2009; Kim et al., 2010; Stange et al., 2010). Ca²⁺-dependent protein kinases (CPKs) function as targets of the cytosolic Ca²⁺ signal, and several members of the CPK family have been shown to function in stimulus-induced stomatal closing, including the Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) CPK3, CPK4, CPK6, CPK10, and CPK11 proteins (Mori et al., 2006; Zhu et al., 2007; Zou et al., 2010; Brandt et al., 2012; Hubbard et al., 2012). Further research found that several CPKs could activate the S-type anion channel SLAC1 in Xenopus laevis oocytes, including CPK21, CPK23, and CPK6 (Geiger et al., 2010; Brandt et al., 2012). At the same time, the Ca²⁺-independent protein kinase Open Stomata1 mediates stomatal closing and activates the S-type anion channel SLAC1 (Mustilli et al., 2002; Yoshida et al., 2002; Geiger et al., 2009; Lee et al., 2009; Xue et al., 2011), indicating that both Ca²⁺-dependent and Ca²⁺-independent pathways function in guard cells.Multiple essential factors of guard cell abscisic acid (ABA) signal transduction function in the regulation of Ca²⁺-permeable channels and [Ca2+]_cyt elevations, including Abscisic Acid Insensitive1 (ABI1), ABI2, Enhanced Response to Abscisic Acid1 (ERA1), the NADPH oxidases AtrbohD and AtrbohF, the Guard Cell Hydrogen Peroxide-Resistant1 (GHR1) receptor kinase, as well as the Ca²⁺-activated CPK6 protein kinase (Pei et al., 1998; Allen et al., 1999, 2002; Kwak et al., 2003; Miao et al., 2006; Mori et al., 2006; Hua et al., 2012). [Ca2+]_cyt increases result from both Ca²⁺ release from intracellular Ca²⁺ stores (McAinsh et al., 1992) and Ca²⁺ influx across the plasma membrane (Hamilton et al., 2000; Pei et al., 2000; Murata et al., 2001; Kwak et al., 2003; Hua et al., 2012). Electrophysiological analyses have characterized nonselective Ca²⁺-permeable channel activity in the plasma membrane of guard cells (Schroeder and Hagiwara, 1990; Hamilton et al., 2000; Pei et al., 2000; Murata et al., 2001; Köhler and Blatt, 2002; Miao et al., 2006; Mori et al., 2006; Suh et al., 2007; Vahisalu et al., 2008; Hua et al., 2012). However, the genetic identities of Ca²⁺-permeable channels in the plasma membrane of guard cells have remained unknown despite over two decades of research on these channel activities.The Arabidopsis genome includes 20 genes encoding cyclic nucleotide-gated channel (CNGC) homologs and 20 genes encoding homologs to animal Glu receptor channels (Lacombe et al., 2001; Kaplan et al., 2007; Ward et al., 2009), which have been proposed to function in plant cells as cation channels (Schuurink et al., 1998; Arazi et al., 1999; Köhler et al., 1999). Recent research has demonstrated functions of specific Glu receptor channels in mediating Ca²⁺ channel activity (Michard et al., 2011; Vincill et al., 2012). Previous studies have shown cAMP activation of nonselective cation currents in guard cells (Lemtiri-Chlieh and Berkowitz, 2004; Ali et al., 2007). However, only a few studies have shown the disappearance of a defined plasma membrane Ca²⁺ channel activity in plants upon mutation of candidate Ca²⁺ channel genes (Ali et al., 2007; Michard et al., 2011; Laohavisit et al., 2012; Vincill et al., 2012). Some CNGCs have been found to be involved in cation nutrient intake, including monovalent cation intake (Guo et al., 2010; Caballero et al., 2012), salt tolerance (Guo et al., 2008; Kugler et al., 2009), programmed cell death and pathogen responses (Clough et al., 2000; Balagué et al., 2003; Urquhart et al., 2007; Abdel-Hamid et al., 2013), thermal sensing (Finka et al., 2012; Gao et al., 2012), and pollen tube growth (Chang et al., 2007; Frietsch et al., 2007; Tunc-Ozdemir et al., 2013a, 2013b). Direct in vivo disappearance of Ca²⁺ channel activity in cngc disruption mutants has been demonstrated in only a few cases thus far (Ali et al., 2007; Gao et al., 2012). In this research, we show that CNGC5 and CNGC6 are required for a cyclic GMP (cGMP)-activated nonselective Ca²⁺-permeable cation channel activity in the plasma membrane of Arabidopsis guard cells.     

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.