共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 31 毫秒
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Necrotrophic and biotrophic pathogens are resisted by different plant defenses. While necrotrophic pathogens are sensitive to jasmonic acid (JA)-dependent resistance, biotrophic pathogens are resisted by salicylic acid (SA)- and reactive oxygen species (ROS)-dependent resistance. Although many pathogens switch from biotrophy to necrotrophy during infection, little is known about the signals triggering this transition. This study is based on the observation that the early colonization pattern and symptom development by the ascomycete pathogen Plectosphaerella cucumerina (P. cucumerina) vary between inoculation methods. Using the Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) defense response as a proxy for infection strategy, we examined whether P. cucumerina alternates between hemibiotrophic and necrotrophic lifestyles, depending on initial spore density and distribution on the leaf surface. Untargeted metabolome analysis revealed profound differences in metabolic defense signatures upon different inoculation methods. Quantification of JA and SA, marker gene expression, and cell death confirmed that infection from high spore densities activates JA-dependent defenses with excessive cell death, while infection from low spore densities induces SA-dependent defenses with lower levels of cell death. Phenotyping of Arabidopsis mutants in JA, SA, and ROS signaling confirmed that P. cucumerina is differentially resisted by JA- and SA/ROS-dependent defenses, depending on initial spore density and distribution on the leaf. Furthermore, in situ staining for early callose deposition at the infection sites revealed that necrotrophy by P. cucumerina is associated with elevated host defense. We conclude that P. cucumerina adapts to early-acting plant defenses by switching from a hemibiotrophic to a necrotrophic infection program, thereby gaining an advantage of immunity-related cell death in the host.Plant pathogens are often classified as necrotrophic or biotrophic, depending on their infection strategy (Glazebrook, 2005; Nishimura and Dangl, 2010). Necrotrophic pathogens kill living host cells and use the decayed plant tissue as a substrate to colonize the plant, whereas biotrophic pathogens parasitize living plant cells by employing effector molecules that suppress the host immune system (Pel and Pieterse, 2013). Despite this binary classification, the majority of pathogenic microbes employ a hemibiotrophic infection strategy, which is characterized by an initial biotrophic phase followed by a necrotrophic infection strategy at later stages of infection (Perfect and Green, 2001). The pathogenic fungi Magnaporthe grisea, Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, and Mycosphaerella graminicola, the oomycete Phytophthora infestans, and the bacterial pathogen Pseudomonas syringae are examples of hemibiotrophic plant pathogens (Perfect and Green, 2001; Koeck et al., 2011; van Kan et al., 2014; Kabbage et al., 2015).Despite considerable progress in our understanding of plant resistance to necrotrophic and biotrophic pathogens (Glazebrook, 2005; Mengiste, 2012; Lai and Mengiste, 2013), recent debate highlights the dynamic and complex interplay between plant-pathogenic microbes and their hosts, which is raising concerns about the use of infection strategies as a static tool to classify plant pathogens. For instance, the fungal genus Botrytis is often labeled as an archetypal necrotroph, even though there is evidence that it can behave as an endophytic fungus with a biotrophic lifestyle (van Kan et al., 2014). The rice blast fungus Magnaporthe oryzae, which is often classified as a hemibiotrophic leaf pathogen (Perfect and Green, 2001; Koeck et al., 2011), can adopt a purely biotrophic lifestyle when infecting root tissues (Marcel et al., 2010). It remains unclear which signals are responsible for the switch from biotrophy to necrotrophy and whether these signals rely solely on the physiological state of the pathogen, or whether host-derived signals play a role as well (Kabbage et al., 2015).The plant hormones salicylic acid (SA) and jasmonic acid (JA) play a central role in the activation of plant defenses (Glazebrook, 2005; Pieterse et al., 2009, 2012). The first evidence that biotrophic and necrotrophic pathogens are resisted by different immune responses came from Thomma et al. (1998), who demonstrated that Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) genotypes impaired in SA signaling show enhanced susceptibility to the biotrophic pathogen Hyaloperonospora arabidopsidis (formerly known as Peronospora parastitica), while JA-insensitive genotypes were more susceptible to the necrotrophic fungus Alternaria brassicicola. In subsequent years, the differential effectiveness of SA- and JA-dependent defense mechanisms has been confirmed in different plant-pathogen interactions, while additional plant hormones, such as ethylene, abscisic acid (ABA), auxins, and cytokinins, have emerged as regulators of SA- and JA-dependent defenses (Bari and Jones, 2009; Cao et al., 2011; Pieterse et al., 2012). Moreover, SA- and JA-dependent defense pathways have been shown to act antagonistically on each other, which allows plants to prioritize an appropriate defense response to attack by biotrophic pathogens, necrotrophic pathogens, or herbivores (Koornneef and Pieterse, 2008; Pieterse et al., 2009; Verhage et al., 2010).In addition to plant hormones, reactive oxygen species (ROS) play an important regulatory role in plant defenses (Torres et al., 2006; Lehmann et al., 2015). Within minutes after the perception of pathogen-associated molecular patterns, NADPH oxidases and apoplastic peroxidases generate early ROS bursts (Torres et al., 2002; Daudi et al., 2012; O’Brien et al., 2012), which activate downstream defense signaling cascades (Apel and Hirt, 2004; Torres et al., 2006; Miller et al., 2009; Mittler et al., 2011; Lehmann et al., 2015). ROS play an important regulatory role in the deposition of callose (Luna et al., 2011; Pastor et al., 2013) and can also stimulate SA-dependent defenses (Chaouch et al., 2010; Yun and Chen, 2011; Wang et al., 2014; Mammarella et al., 2015). However, the spread of SA-induced apoptosis during hyperstimulation of the plant immune system is contained by the ROS-generating NADPH oxidase RBOHD (Torres et al., 2005), presumably to allow for the sufficient generation of SA-dependent defense signals from living cells that are adjacent to apoptotic cells. Nitric oxide (NO) plays an additional role in the regulation of SA/ROS-dependent defense (Trapet et al., 2015). This gaseous molecule can stimulate ROS production and cell death in the absence of SA while preventing excessive ROS production at high cellular SA levels via S-nitrosylation of RBOHD (Yun et al., 2011). Recently, it was shown that pathogen-induced accumulation of NO and ROS promotes the production of azelaic acid, a lipid derivative that primes distal plants for SA-dependent defenses (Wang et al., 2014). Hence, NO, ROS, and SA are intertwined in a complex regulatory network to mount local and systemic resistance against biotrophic pathogens. Interestingly, pathogens with a necrotrophic lifestyle can benefit from ROS/SA-dependent defenses and associated cell death (Govrin and Levine, 2000). For instance, Kabbage et al. (2013) demonstrated that S. sclerotiorum utilizes oxalic acid to repress oxidative defense signaling during initial biotrophic colonization, but it stimulates apoptosis at later stages to advance necrotrophic colonization. Moreover, SA-induced repression of JA-dependent resistance not only benefits necrotrophic pathogens but also hemibiotrophic pathogens after having switched from biotrophy to necrotrophy (Glazebrook, 2005; Pieterse et al., 2009, 2012).Plectosphaerella
cucumerina ((P. cucumerina, anamorph Plectosporum tabacinum) anamorph Plectosporum tabacinum) is a filamentous ascomycete fungus that can survive saprophytically in soil by decomposing plant material (Palm et al., 1995). The fungus can cause sudden death and blight disease in a variety of crops (Chen et al., 1999; Harrington et al., 2000). Because P. cucumerina can infect Arabidopsis leaves, the P. cucumerina-Arabidopsis interaction has emerged as a popular model system in which to study plant defense reactions to necrotrophic fungi (Berrocal-Lobo et al., 2002; Ton and Mauch-Mani, 2004; Carlucci et al., 2012; Ramos et al., 2013). Various studies have shown that Arabidopsis deploys a wide range of inducible defense strategies against P. cucumerina, including JA-, SA-, ABA-, and auxin-dependent defenses, glucosinolates (Tierens et al., 2001; Sánchez-Vallet et al., 2010; Gamir et al., 2014; Pastor et al., 2014), callose deposition (García-Andrade et al., 2011; Gamir et al., 2012, 2014; Sánchez-Vallet et al., 2012), and ROS (Tierens et al., 2002; Sánchez-Vallet et al., 2010; Barna et al., 2012; Gamir et al., 2012, 2014; Pastor et al., 2014). Recent metabolomics studies have revealed large-scale metabolic changes in P. cucumerina-infected Arabidopsis, presumably to mobilize chemical defenses (Sánchez-Vallet et al., 2010; Gamir et al., 2014; Pastor et al., 2014). Furthermore, various chemical agents have been reported to induce resistance against P. cucumerina. These chemicals include β-amino-butyric acid, which primes callose deposition and SA-dependent defenses, benzothiadiazole (BTH or Bion; Görlach et al., 1996; Ton and Mauch-Mani, 2004), which activates SA-related defenses (Lawton et al., 1996; Ton and Mauch-Mani, 2004; Gamir et al., 2014; Luna et al., 2014), JA (Ton and Mauch-Mani, 2004), and ABA, which primes ROS and callose deposition (Ton and Mauch-Mani, 2004; Pastor et al., 2013). However, among all these studies, there is increasing controversy about the exact signaling pathways and defense responses contributing to plant resistance against P. cucumerina. While it is clear that JA and ethylene contribute to basal resistance against the fungus, the exact roles of SA, ABA, and ROS in P. cucumerina resistance vary between studies (Thomma et al., 1998; Ton and Mauch-Mani, 2004; Sánchez-Vallet et al., 2012; Gamir et al., 2014).This study is based on the observation that the disease phenotype during P. cucumerina infection differs according to the inoculation method used. We provide evidence that the fungus follows a hemibiotrophic infection strategy when infecting from relatively low spore densities on the leaf surface. By contrast, when challenged by localized host defense to relatively high spore densities, the fungus switches to a necrotrophic infection program. Our study has uncovered a novel strategy by which plant-pathogenic fungi can take advantage of the early immune response in the host plant. 相似文献
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Tianyuan Yang Song Zhang Yibing Hu Fachi Wu Qingdi Hu Guang Chen Jing Cai Ting Wu Nava Moran Ling Yu Guohua Xu 《Plant physiology》2014,166(2):945-959
In plants, K transporter (KT)/high affinity K transporter (HAK)/K uptake permease (KUP) is the largest potassium (K) transporter family; however, few of the members have had their physiological functions characterized in planta. Here, we studied OsHAK5 of the KT/HAK/KUP family in rice (Oryza sativa). We determined its cellular and tissue localization and analyzed its functions in rice using both OsHAK5 knockout mutants and overexpression lines in three genetic backgrounds. A β-glucuronidase reporter driven by the OsHAK5 native promoter indicated OsHAK5 expression in various tissue organs from root to seed, abundantly in root epidermis and stele, the vascular tissues, and mesophyll cells. Net K influx rate in roots and K transport from roots to aerial parts were severely impaired by OsHAK5 knockout but increased by OsHAK5 overexpression in 0.1 and 0.3 mm
K external solution. The contribution of OsHAK5 to K mobilization within the rice plant was confirmed further by the change of K concentration in the xylem sap and K distribution in the transgenic lines when K was removed completely from the external solution. Overexpression of OsHAK5 increased the K-sodium concentration ratio in the shoots and salt stress tolerance (shoot growth), while knockout of OsHAK5 decreased the K-sodium concentration ratio in the shoots, resulting in sensitivity to salt stress. Taken together, these results demonstrate that OsHAK5 plays a major role in K acquisition by roots faced with low external K and in K upward transport from roots to shoots in K-deficient rice plants.Potassium (K) is one of the three most important macronutrients and the most abundant cation in plants. As a major osmoticum in the vacuole, K drives the generation of turgor pressure, enabling cell expansion. In the vascular tissue, K is an important participant in the generation of root pressure (for review, see Wegner, 2014 [including his new hypothesis]). In the phloem, K is critical for the transport of photoassimilates from source to sink (Marschner, 1996; Deeken et al., 2002; Gajdanowicz et al., 2011). In addition, enhancing K absorption and decreasing sodium (Na) accumulation is a major strategy of glycophytes in salt stress tolerance (Maathuis and Amtmann, 1999; Munns and Tester, 2008; Shabala and Cuin, 2008).Plants acquire K through K-permeable proteins at the root surface. Since available K concentration in the soil may vary by 100-fold, plants have developed multiple K uptake systems for adapting to this variability (Epstein et al., 1963; Grabov, 2007; Maathuis, 2009). In a classic K uptake experiment in barley (Hordeum vulgare), root K absorption has been described as a high-affinity and low-affinity biphasic transport process (Epstein et al., 1963). It is generally assumed that the low-affinity transport system (LATS) in the roots mediates K uptake in the millimolar range and that the activity of this system is insensitive to external K concentration (Maathuis and Sanders, 1997; Chérel et al., 2014). In contrast, the high-affinity transport system (HATS) was rapidly up-regulated when the supply of exogenous K was halted (Glass, 1976; Glass and Dunlop, 1978).The membrane transporters for K flux identified in plants are generally classified into three channels and three transporter families based on phylogenetic analysis (Mäser et al., 2001; Véry and Sentenac, 2003; Lebaudy et al., 2007; Alemán et al., 2011). For K uptake, it was predicted that, under most circumstances, K transporters function as HATS, while K-permeable channels mediate LATS (Maathuis and Sanders, 1997). However, a root-expressed K channel in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), Arabidopsis K Transporter1 (AKT1), mediates K absorption over a wide range of external K concentrations (Sentenac et al., 1992; Lagarde et al., 1996; Hirsch et al., 1998; Spalding et al., 1999), while evidence is accumulating that many K transporters, including members of the K transporter (KT)/high affinity K transporter (HAK)/K uptake permease (KUP) family, are low-affinity K transporters (Quintero and Blatt, 1997; Senn et al., 2001), implying that functions of plant K channels and transporters overlap at different K concentration ranges.Out of the three families of K transporters, cation proton antiporter (CPA), high affinity K/Na transporter (HKT), and KT/HAK/KUP, CPA was characterized as a K+(Na+)/H+ antiporter, HKT may cotransport Na and K or transport Na only (Rubio et al., 1995; Uozumi et al., 2000), while KT/HAK/KUP were predicted to be H+-coupled K+ symporters (Mäser et al., 2001; Lebaudy et al., 2007). KT/HAK/KUP were named by different researchers who first identified and cloned them (Quintero and Blatt, 1997; Santa-María et al., 1997). In plants, the KT/HAK/KUP family is the largest K transporter family, including 13 members in Arabidopsis and 27 members in the rice (Oryza sativa) genome (Rubio et al., 2000; Mäser et al., 2001; Bañuelos et al., 2002; Gupta et al., 2008). Sequence alignments show that genes of this family share relatively low homology to each other. The KT/HAK/KUP family was divided into four major clusters (Rubio et al., 2000; Gupta et al., 2008), and in cluster I and II, they were further separated into A and B groups. Genes of cluster I or II likely exist in all plants, cluster III is composed of genes from both Arabidopsis and rice, while cluster IV includes only four rice genes (Grabov, 2007; Gupta et al., 2008).The functions of KT/HAK/KUP were studied mostly in heterologous expression systems. Transporters of cluster I, such as AtHAK5, HvHAK1, OsHAK1, and OsHAK5, are localized in the plasma membrane (Kim et al., 1998; Bañuelos et al., 2002; Gierth et al., 2005) and exhibit high-affinity K uptake in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae (Santa-María et al., 1997; Fu and Luan, 1998; Rubio et al., 2000) and in Escherichia coli (Horie et al., 2011). Transporters of cluster II, like AtKUP4 (TINY ROOT HAIRS1, TRH1), HvHAK2, OsHAK2, OsHAK7, and OsHAK10, could not complement the K uptake-deficient yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) but were able to mediate K fluxes in a bacterial mutant; they might be tonoplast transporters (Senn et al., 2001; Bañuelos et al., 2002; Rodríguez-Navarro and Rubio, 2006). The function of transporters in clusters III and IV is even less known (Grabov, 2007).Existing data suggest that some KT/HAK/KUP transporters also may respond to salinity stress (Maathuis, 2009). The cluster I transporters of HvHAK1 mediate Na influx (Santa-María et al., 1997), while AtHAK5 expression is inhibited by Na (Rubio et al., 2000; Nieves-Cordones et al., 2010). Expression of OsHAK5 in tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) BY2 cells enhanced the salt tolerance of these cells by accumulating more K without affecting their Na content (Horie et al., 2011).There are only scarce reports on the physiological function of KT/HAK/KUP in planta. In Arabidopsis, mutation of AtKUP2 (SHORT HYPOCOTYL3) resulted in a short hypocotyl, small leaves, and a short flowering stem (Elumalai et al., 2002), while a loss-of-function mutation of AtKUP4 (TRH1) resulted in short root hairs and a loss of gravity response in the root (Rigas et al., 2001; Desbrosses et al., 2003; Ahn et al., 2004). AtHAK5 is the only system currently known to mediate K uptake at concentrations below 0.01 mm (Rubio et al., 2010) and provides a cesium uptake pathway (Qi et al., 2008). AtHAK5 and AtAKT1 are the two major physiologically relevant molecular entities mediating K uptake into roots in the range between 0.01 and 0.05 mm (Pyo et al., 2010; Rubio et al., 2010). AtAKT1 may contribute to K uptake within the K concentrations that belong to the high-affinity system described by Epstein et al. (1963).Among all 27 members of the KT/HAK/KUP family in rice, OsHAK1, OsHAK5, OsHAK19, and OsHAK20 were grouped in cluster IB (Gupta et al., 2008). These four rice HAK members share 50.9% to 53.4% amino acid identity with AtHAK5. OsHAK1 was expressed in the whole plant, with maximum expression in roots, and was up-regulated by K deficiency; it mediated high-affinity K uptake in yeast (Bañuelos et al., 2002). In this study, we examined the tissue-specific localization and the physiological functions of OsHAK5 in response to variation in K supply and to salt stress in rice. By comparing K uptake and translocation in OsHAK5 knockout (KO) mutants and in OsHAK5-overexpressing lines with those in their respective wild-type lines supplied with different K concentrations, we found that OsHAK5 not only mediates high-affinity K acquisition but also participates in root-to-shoot K transport as well as in K-regulated salt tolerance. 相似文献
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.