Auxin acts independently of DELLA proteins in regulating gibberellin levels

Shoot elongation is a vital process for plant development and productivity, in both ecological and economic contexts. Auxin and bioactive gibberellins (GAs), such as GA₁, play critical roles in the control of elongation,^1–3 along with environmental and endogenous factors, including other hormones such as the brassinosteroids.^4,5 The effect of auxins, such as indole-3-acetic acid (IAA), is at least in part mediated by its effect on GA metabolism,⁶ since auxin upregulates biosynthesis genes such as GA 3-oxidase and GA 20-oxidase and downregulates GA catabolism genes such as GA 2-oxidases, leading to elevated levels of bioactive GA₁.⁷ In our recent paper,¹ we have provided evidence that this action of IAA is largely independent of DELLA proteins, the negative regulators of GA action,^8,9 since the auxin effects are still present in the DELLA-deficient la cry-s genotype of pea. This was a crucial issue to resolve, since like auxin, the DELLAs also promote GA₁ synthesis and inhibit its deactivation. DELLAs are deactivated by GA, and thereby mediate a feedback system by which bioactive GA regulates its own level.¹⁰ However, our recent results,¹ in themselves, do not show the generality of the auxin-GA relationship across species and phylogenetic groups or across different tissue types and responses. Further, they do not touch on the ecological benefits of the auxin-GA interaction. These issues are discussed below as well as the need for the development of suitable experimental systems to allow this process to be examined.Key words: auxin, gibberellins, DELLA proteins, interactions, elongation     

Irrepressible,truncated Auxin Response Factors: Natural roles and applications in dissecting auxin gene regulation pathways

The molecularly well-characterized auxin signal transduction pathway involves two evolutionarily conserved families interacting through their C-terminal domains III and IV: the Auxin Response Factors (ARFs) and their repressors the Aux/IAAs, to control auxin-responsive genes, among them genes involved in auxin transport.^1,2 We have developed a new genetic tool to study ARF function. Using MONOPTEROS (MP)/ARF5, we have generated a truncated version of MP (MPΔ),³ which has lost the target domains for repression by Aux/IAA proteins. Besides exploring genetic interactions between MP and Aux/IAAs, we used this construct to trace MP’s role in vascular patterning, a previously characterized auxin dependent process.^4,5 Here we summarize examples of naturally occurring truncated ARFs and summarize potential applications of truncated ARFs as analytical tools.     

Redox regulation of auxin signaling and plant development in Arabidopsis

Thioredoxin (NTR/TRX) and glutathione (GSH/GRX) are the two major systems that play a key role in the maintenance of cellular redox homeostasis. They are essential for plant development, cell division or the response to environmental stresses. In a recent article,¹ we studied the interplay between the NADP-linked thioredoxin and glutathione systems in auxin signaling genetically, by associating TRX reductase (ntra ntrb) and glutathione biosynthesis (cad2) mutations. We show that these two thiol reduction pathways interfere with developmental processes. This occurs through modulation of auxin activity as shown by genetic analyses of loss of function mutations in a triple ntra ntrb cad2 mutant. The triple mutant develops almost normally at the rosette stage but fails to generate lateral organs from the inflorescence meristem, producing almost naked stems that are reminiscent of mutants affected in PAT (polar auxin transport) or biosynthesis. The triple mutant exhibits other defects in processes regulated by auxin, including a loss of apical dominance, vasculature defects and reduced secondary root production. Furthermore, it has lower auxin (IAA) levels and decreased capacity for PAT, suggesting that the NTR and glutathione pathways influence inflorescence meristem development through regulation of auxin transport and metabolism.Key words: arabidopsis, NTS pathway, NGS pathway, thioredoxin (TRX), glutaredoxine (GRX), polar auxin transport (PAT), auxin biosynthesis, pin-like phenotype, apical dominance, meristematic activityExposure of living organisms to environmental stresses triggers various defense and developmental responses. Redox signaling is involved in many aspects of these responses.^2–6 The key players in these responses are the NADPH-dependent glutathione/glutaredoxin system (NGS) and the NADPH-dependent thioredoxin system (NTS). TRX and GRX play key roles in the maintenance of cellular redox homeostasis.^7–10 Genetic approaches aiming to identify functions of TRX and GRX in knock-out plants have largely been limited by the absence of phenotypes of single mutants, presumably due to functional redundancies among members of the multigene families of TRX and GRX.¹¹ Interplay between NTS and NGS pathways have been studied in different organisms^12–17 and association of mutants involved in these two pathways have recently revealed new functions in several aspects of plant development.^4–6     

ARF-GTPase as a Molecular Switch for Polar Auxin Transport Mediated by Vesicle Trafficking in Root Development

Polar auxin transport (PAT), which is controlled precisely by both auxin efflux and influx facilitators and mediated by the cell trafficking system, modulates organogenesis, development and root gravitropism. ADP-ribosylation factor (ARF)-GTPase protein is catalyzed to switch to the GTP-bound type by a guanine nucleotide exchange factor (GEF) and promoted for hybridization to the GDP-bound type by a GTPase-activating protein (GAP). Previous studies showed that auxin efflux facilitators such as PIN1 are regulated by GNOM, an ARF-GEF, in Arabidopsis. In the November issue of The Plant Journal, we reported that the auxin influx facilitator AUX1 was regulated by ARF-GAP via the vesicle trafficking system.¹ In this addendum, we report that overexpression of OsAGAP leads to enhanced root gravitropism and propose a new model of PAT regulation: a loop mechanism between ARF-GAP and GEF mediated by vesicle trafficking to regulate PAT at influx and efflux facilitators, thus controlling root development in plants.Key Words: ADP-ribosylation factor (ARF), ARF-GAP, ARF-GEF, auxin, GNOM, polar transport of auxinPolar auxin transport (PAT) is a unique process in plants. It results in alteration of auxin level, which controls organogenesis and development and a series of physiological processes, such as vascular differentiation, apical dominance, and tropic growth.² Genetic and physiological studies identified that PAT depends on efflux facilitators such as PIN family proteins and influx facilitators such as AUX1 in Arabidopsis.Eight PIN family proteins, AtPIN1 to AtPIN8, exist in Arabidopsis. AtPIN1 is located at the basal side of the plasma membrane in vascular tissues but is weak in cortical tissues, which supports the hypothesis of chemical pervasion.³ AtPIN2 is localized at the apical side of epidermal cells and basally in cortical cells.^1,4 GNOM, an ARF GEF, modulates the localization of PIN1 and vesicle trafficking and affects root development.^5,6 The PIN auxin-efflux facilitator network controls root growth and patterning in Arabidopsis.⁴ As well, asymmetric localization of AUX1 occurs in the root cells of Arabidopsis plants,⁷ and overexpression of OsAGAP interferes with localization of AUX1.¹ Our data support that ARF-GAP mediates auxin influx and auxin-dependent root growth and patterning, which involves vesicle trafficking.¹ Here we show that OsAGAP overexpression leads to enhanced gravitropic response in transgenic rice plants. We propose a model whereby ARF GTPase is a molecular switch to control PAT and root growth and development.Overexpression of OsAGAP led to reduced growth in primary or adventitious roots of rice as compared with wild-type rice.¹ Gravitropism assay revealed transgenic rice overxpressing OsAGAP with a faster response to gravity than the wild type during 24-h treatment. However, 1-naphthyl acetic acid (NAA) treatment promoted the gravitropic response of the wild type, with no difference in response between the OsAGAP transgenic plants and the wild type plants (Fig. 1). The phenotype of enhanced gravitropic response in the transgenic plants was similar to that in the mutants atmdr1-100 and atmdr1-100/atpgp1-100 related to Arabidopsis ABC (ATP-binding cassette) transporter and defective in PAT.⁸ The physiological data, as well as data on localization of auxin transport facilitators, support ARF-GAP modulating PAT via regulating the location of the auxin influx facilitator AUX1.¹ So the alteration in gravitropic response in the OsAGAP transgenic plants was explained by a defect in PAT.Open in a separate windowFigure 1Gravitropism of OsAGAP overexpressing transgenic rice roots and response to 1-naphthyl acetic acid (NAA). (A) Gravitropism phenotype of wild type (WT) and OsAGAP overexpressing roots at 6 hr gravi-stimulation (top panel) and 0 hr as a treatment control (bottom panel). (B) Time course of gravitropic response in transgenic roots. (C and D) results correspond to those in (A and B), except for treatment with NAA (5 × 10⁻⁷ M).The polarity of auxin transport is controlled by the asymmetric distribution of auxin transport proteins, efflux facilitators and influx carriers. ARF GTPase is a key member in vesicle trafficking system and modulates cell polarity and PAT in plants. Thus, ARF-GDP or GTP bound with GEF or GAP determines the ARF function on auxin efflux facilitators (such as PIN1) or influx ones (such as AUX1).ARF1, targeting ROP2 and PIN2, affects epidermal cell polarity.⁹ GNOM is involved in the regulation of PIN1 asymmetric localization in cells and its related function in organogenesis and development.⁶ Although VAN3, an ARF-GAP in Arabidopsis, is located in a subpopulation of the trans-Golgi transport network (TGN), which is involved in leaf vascular network formation, it does not affect PAT.¹⁰ OsAGAP possesses an ARF GTPase-activating function in rice.¹¹ Specifically, our evidence supports that ARF-GAP bound with ARF-GTP modulates PAT and gravitropism via AUX1, mediated by vesicle trafficking, including the Golgi stack.¹Therefore, we propose a loop mechanism between ARF-GAP and GEF mediated by the vascular trafficking system in regulating PAT at influx and efflux facilitators, which controls root development and gravitropism in plants (Fig. 2). Here we emphasize that ARF-GEF catalyzes a conversion of ARF-bound GDP to GTP, which is necessary for the efficient delivery of the vesicle to the target membrane.¹² An opposite process of ARF-bound GDP to GTP is promoted by ARF-GTPase-activating protein via binding. A loop status of ARF-GTP and ARF-GDP bound with their appurtenances controls different auxin facilitators and regulates root development and gravitropism.Open in a separate windowFigure 2Model for ARF GTPase as a molecular switch for the polar auxin transport mediated by the vesicle traffic system.     

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.     

Arabidopsis FAB1A/B is possibly involved in the recycling of auxin transporters

Fab1/PIKfyve produces Phosphatidylinositol-3,5-bisphosphate (PtdIns (3,5) P₂) from Phosphatidylinositol-3-phosphate (PtdIns 3-P), and is involved not only in vacuole/lysosome homeostasis, but also in transporting various proteins to the vacuole or recycling proteins on the plasma membrane (PM) through the use of endosomes in a variety of eukaryotic cells. We previously demonstrated that Arabidopsis FAB1A/B functions as PtdIns-3,5-kinase in both Arabidopsis and fission yeast and plays a key role in vacuolar acidification and endocytosis. Although the conditional FAB1A/B knockdown mutant revealed an auxin-resistant phenotype to a membrane-impermeable auxin, 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D), the mutant did not exhibit this phenotype to a membrane-permeable artificial auxin, naphthalene 1-acetic acid (NAA). The difference in the sensitivities to 2,4-D and NAA is similar to those of the auxin-resistant mutants such as aux1. Taken together, these results suggest that impairment of the function of Arabidopsis FAB1A/B might cause a defect in the membrane recycling capabilities of the auxin transporters and inhibit proper auxin transport into the cells in Arabidopsis.Key words: auxin signaling, auxin transporter, recycling of plasma membrane proteinsPhosphatidylinositol-3,5-bisphosphate (PtdIns (3,5) P₂) exists on the external membrane of multi-vesicular bodies (MVBs) at very low levels in eukaryotic cells,^1,2 and plays key roles in endomembrane homeostasis including endocytosis, vacuole/lysosome formation and vacuolar acidification.^1,3 PtdIns (3,5) P₂ deficiency causes an enlarged vacuolar structure in yeast and mammalian cells.^4,5 FAB1 forms a protein complex with its regulatory molecules, and synthesizes PtdIns (3,5) P₂ from PtdIns 3P.^6–9 In Arabidopsis, there are four Fab1/PIKfyve orthologs (FAB1A, FAB1B, FAB1C and FAB1D) in the genome, and the double homozygous mutant of FAB1A and FAB1B exhibited the male gametophyte lethal phenotype.¹⁰ Previously, we reported that conditional loss-of-function and gain-of-function mutants of FAB1A/B impair endomembrane homeostasis and reveal various developmental phenotypes.¹¹ Interestingly, lateral root formation by exogenous auxin, which is known as a typical auxin-responsive phenotype, was largely impaired when FAB1A/B expression was conditionally downregulated or upregulated. From these results, we speculated that the defect in the endocytosis process in fab1a/b mutants might inhibit the precise recycling process of auxin transporters on the PM, thereby inhibiting proper auxin transport into the plant cells.¹¹ In this report, we tested this hypothesis to assess the sensitivity on auxin-dependent lateral root formation to a membrane permeable auxin, NAA, in the fab1a/b knockdown mutant.     

Localized auxin biosynthesis and postembryonic root development in Arabidopsis

Auxin is a phytohormone essential for plant development. Due to the high redundancy in auxin biosynthesis, the role of auxin biosynthesis in embryogenesis and seedling development, vascular and flower development, shade avoidance and ethylene response were revealed only recently. We previously reported that a vitamin B₆ biosynthesis mutant pdx1 exhibits a short-root phenotype with reduced meristematic zone and short mature cells. By reciprocal grafting, we now have found that the pdx1 short root is caused by a root locally generated signal. The mutant root tips are defective in callus induction and have reduced DR5::GUS activity, but maintain relatively normal auxin response. Genetic analysis indicates that pdx1 mutant could suppress the root hair and root growth phenotypes of the auxin overproduction mutant yucca on medium supplemented with tryptophan (Trp), suggesting that the conversion from Trp to auxin is impaired in pdx1 roots. Here we present data showing that pdx1 mutant is more tolerant to 5-methyl anthranilate, an analogue of the Trp biosynthetic intermediate anthranilate, demonstrating that pdx1 is also defective in the conversion from anthranilate to auxin precursor tryptophan. Our data suggest that locally synthesized auxin may play an important role in the postembryonic root growth.Key words: auxin synthesis, root, PLP, PDX1The plant hormone auxin modulates many aspects of growth and development including cell division and cell expansion, leaf initiation, root development, embryo and fruit development, pattern formation, tropism, apical dominance and vascular tissue differentiation.^1–3 Indole-3-acetic acid (IAA) is the major naturally occurring auxin. IAA can be synthesized in cotyledons, leaves and roots, with young developing leaves having the highest capacity.^4,5Auxin most often acts in tissues or cells remote from its synthetic sites, and thus depends on non-polar phloem transport as well as a highly regulated intercellular polar transport system for its distribution.²The importance of local auxin biosynthesis in plant growth and development has been masked by observations that impaired long-distance auxin transport can result in severe growth or developmental defects.^3,6 Furthermore, a few mutants with reduced free IAA contents display phenotypes similar to those caused by impaired long-distance auxin transport. These phenotypes include defective vascular tissues and flower development, short primary roots and reduced apical dominance, or impaired shade avoidance and ethylene response.^7–15 Since these phenotypes most often could not be rescued by exogenous auxin application, it is difficult to attribute such defects to altered local auxin biosynthesis. By complementing double, triple or quadruple mutants of four Arabidopsis shoot-abundant auxin biosynthesis YUCCA genes with specific YUCCA promoters driven bacterial auxin biosynthesis iaaM gene, Cheng et al. provided unambiguous evidence that auxin biosynthesis is indispensable for embryo, flower and vascular tissue development.^8,13 Importantly, it is clear that auxin synthesized by YUCCAs is not functionally interchangeable among different organs, supporting the notion that auxin synthesized by YUCCAs mainly functions locally or in a short range.^6,8,13The central role of auxin in root meristem patterning and maintenance is well documented,^1,2,16 but the source of such IAA is still unclear. When ¹⁴C-labeled IAA was applied to the five-day-old pea apical bud, the radioactivity could be detected in lateral root primordia but not the apical region of primary roots.¹⁷ Moreover, removal of the shoot only slightly affected elongation of the primary root, and localized application of auxin polar transport inhibitor naphthylphthalamic acid (NPA) at the primary root tip exerted more profound inhibitory effect on root elongation than at any other site.¹⁸ These results suggest that auxin generated near the root tip may play a more important role in primary root growth than that transported from the shoot. In line with this notion, Arabidopsis roots have been shown to harbor multiple auxin biosynthesis sites including root tips and the region upward from the tip.⁴Many steps of tryptophan synthesis and its conversion to auxin involve transamination reactions, which require the vitamin B₆ pyridoxal 5-phosphate (PLP) as a cofactor. We previously reported that the Arabidopsis mutant pdx1 that is defective in vitamin B₆ biosynthesis displays dramatically reduced primary root growth with smaller meristematic zone and shorter mature cortical cells.¹⁹ In the current investigation, we found that the root tips of pdx1 have reduced cell division capability and reduced DR5::GUS activity, although the induction of this reporter gene by exogenous auxin was not changed. Reciprocal grafting indicates that the short-root phenotype of pdx1 is caused by a root local rather than shoot generated factor(s). Importantly, pdx1 suppresses yucca mutant, an auxin overproducer, in root hair proliferation although it fails to suppress the hypocotyl elongation phenotype.²⁰ Our work thus demonstrated that pdx1 has impaired root local auxin biosynthesis from tryptophan. To test whether the synthesis of tryptophan is also affected in pdx1 mutant, we planted pdx1 together with wild-type seeds on Murashige and Skoog (MS) medium supplemented with 5-mehtyl-anthranilate (5-MA), an analogue of the Trp biosynthetic intermediate anthranilate.²¹ Although pdx1 seedlings grew poorly under the control conditions, the growth of wild-type seedlings was more inhibited than that of the pdx1 seedlings on 10 µM 5-MA media (Fig. 1A–D). Compared with the elongated primary root on MS, wild-type seedlings showed very limited root growth on 5-MA (Fig. 1E). The relatively increased tolerance to 5-MA of pdx1 thus indicates that the pdx1 mutant may be defective in Trp biosynthesis, although amino acid analysis of the bulked seedlings did not find clear changes in Trp levels in the mutants (our unpublished data).Open in a separate windowFigure 1The pdx1 mutant seedlings are relatively less sensitive to toxic 5-methyl anthranilate (5-MA). (A and C) Five-day-old seedlings of the wild type (Col-0) (A) or pdx1 (C) on MS medium. (B and D) Five-day-old seedlings of the wild type (B) or pdx1 (D) on MS medium supplemented with 10 µM 5-MA. (E) Eight-day-old seedlings of the wild type or pdx1 on MS medium without or with 10 µM 5-MA supplement. Sterilized seeds were planted directly on the indicated medium and after two days of cold treatment, the plates were incubated under continuous light at 22–24°C before taking pictures.We reported that PDX1 is required for tolerance to oxidative stresses in Arabidopsis.¹⁹ Interestingly, redox homeostasis appears to play a critical role in Arabidopsis root development. The glutathione-deficient mutant root meristemless1 (rml1) and the vitamin C-deficient mutant vitamin C1 (vtc1) both have similar stunted roots.^22,23 Nonetheless, pdx1 is not rescued by either glutathione or vitamin C¹⁹ suggesting that the pdx1 short-root phenotype may not be resulted from a general reduction of antioxidative capacity. Interestingly, ascorbate oxidase is found to be highly expressed in the maize root quiescent center.²⁴ This enzyme can oxidatively decarboxylate auxin in vitro, suggesting that the quiescent center may be a site for metabolizing auxin to control its homeostasis.²⁵ It is therefore likely that the reduced auxin level in pdx1 root tips could be partially caused by increased auxin catabolism resulted from reduced vitamin B₆ level. We thus conducted experiments to test this possibility. A quiescent center-specific promoter WOX5 driven bacterial auxin biosynthetic gene iaaH²⁶ was introduced into pdx1 mutant. The transgenic seeds were planted on media supplemented with different concentrations of indoleacetamide (IAM), the substrate of iaaH protein. Although promotion of lateral root growth was observed at higher IAM concentrations, which indicates increased tryptophan-independent auxin production from the transgene, no change in root elongation was observed between pdx1 with or without the WOX5::iaaH transgene at any concentration of IAM tested (data not shown), suggesting that the pdx1 short-root phenotype may not be due to increased auxin catabolism.Taken together, in addition to auxin transport; temporally, spatially or developmentally coordinated local auxin biosynthesis defines the plant growth and its response to environmental changes.^8,14,15     

Cell Migration from Baby to Mother

Fetal cells migrate into the mother during pregnancy. Fetomaternal transfer probably occurs in all pregnancies and in humans the fetal cells can persist for decades. Microchimeric fetal cells are found in various maternal tissues and organs including blood, bone marrow, skin and liver. In mice, fetal cells have also been found in the brain. The fetal cells also appear to target sites of injury. Fetomaternal microchimerism may have important implications for the immune status of women, influencing autoimmunity and tolerance to transplants. Further understanding of the ability of fetal cells to cross both the placental and blood-brain barriers, to migrate into diverse tissues, and to differentiate into multiple cell types may also advance strategies for intravenous transplantation of stem cells for cytotherapeutic repair. Here we discuss hypotheses for how fetal cells cross the placental and blood-brain barriers and the persistence and distribution of fetal cells in the mother.Key Words: fetomaternal microchimerism, stem cells, progenitor cells, placental barrier, blood-brain barrier, adhesion, migrationMicrochimerism is the presence of a small population of genetically distinct and separately derived cells within an individual. This commonly occurs following transfusion or transplantation.^1–3 Microchimerism can also occur between mother and fetus. Small numbers of cells traffic across the placenta during pregnancy. This exchange occurs both from the fetus to the mother (fetomaternal)^4–7 and from the mother to the fetus.^8–10 Similar exchange may also occur between monochorionic twins in utero.^11–13 There is increasing evidence that fetomaternal microchimerism persists lifelong in many child-bearing women.^7,14 The significance of fetomaternal microchimerism remains unclear. It could be that fetomaternal microchimerism is an epiphenomenon of pregnancy. Alternatively, it could be a mechanism by which the fetus ensures maternal fitness in order to enhance its own chances of survival. In either case, the occurrence of pregnancy-acquired microchimerism in women may have implications for graft survival and autoimmunity. More detailed understanding of the biology of microchimeric fetal cells may also advance progress towards cytotherapeutic repair via intravenous transplantation of stem or progenitor cells.Trophoblasts were the first zygote-derived cell type found to cross into the mother. In 1893, Schmorl reported the appearance of trophoblasts in the maternal pulmonary vasculature.¹⁵ Later, trophoblasts were also observed in the maternal circulation.^16–20 Subsequently various other fetal cell types derived from fetal blood were also found in the maternal circulation.^21,22 These fetal cell types included lymphocytes,²³ erythroblasts or nucleated red blood cells,^24,25 haematopoietic progenitors^7,26,27 and putative mesenchymal progenitors.^14,28 While it has been suggested that small numbers of fetal cells traffic across the placenta in every human pregnancy,^29–31 trophoblast release does not appear to occur in all pregnancies.³² Likewise, in mice, fetal cells have also been reported in maternal blood.^33,34 In the mouse, fetomaternal transfer also appears to occur during all pregnancies.³⁵     

RALFs: Peptide regulators of plant growth

Peptide signaling regulates a variety of developmental processes and environmental responses in plants.^1–6 For example, the peptide systemin induces the systemic defense response in tomato⁷ and defensins are small cysteine-rich proteins that are involved in the innate immune system of plants.^8,9 The CLAVATA3 peptide regulates meristem size¹⁰ and the SCR peptide is the pollen self-incompatibility recognition factor in the Brassicaceae.^11,12 LURE peptides produced by synergid cells attract pollen tubes to the embryo sac.⁹ RALFs are a recently discovered family of plant peptides that play a role in plant cell growth.Key words: peptide, growth factor, alkalinization     

Staying in the fold: The SGT1/chaperone machinery in maintenance and evolution of leucine-rich repeat proteins

The conserved eukaryotic protein SGT1 (suppressor of G₂ allele of skp1) participates in diverse physiological processes such as cell cycle progression in yeast, plant immunity against pathogens and plant hormone signalling. Recent genetic and biochemical studies suggest that SGT1 functions as a novel co-chaperone for cytosolic/nuclear HSP90 and HSP70 molecular chaperones in the folding and maturation of substrate proteins. Since proteins containing the leucine-rich repeat (LRR) protein-protein interaction motif are overrepresented in SGT1-dependent phenomena, we consider whether LRR-containing proteins are preferential substrates of an SGT1/HSP70/HSP90 complex. Such a chaperone organisation is reminiscent of the HOP/HSP70/HSP90 machinery which controls maturation and activation of glucocorticoid receptors in animals. Drawing on this parallel, we discuss the possible contribution of an SGT1-chaperone complex in the folding and maturation of LRR-containing proteins and its evolutionary consequences for the emergence of novel LRR interaction surfaces.Key words: heat shock protein, SGT1, co-chaperone, HSP90, HSP70, leucine-rich repeat, LRR, resistance, SCF, ubiquitinThe proper folding and maturation of proteins is essential for cell viability during de novo protein synthesis, translocation, complex assembly or under denaturing stress conditions. A complex machinery composed of molecular chaperones (heat-shock proteins, HSPs) and their modulators known as co-chaperones, catalyzes these protein folding events.^1,2 In animals, defects in the chaperone machinery is implicated in an increasing number of diseases such as cancers, susceptibility to viruses, neurodegenerative disease and cystic fibrosis, and thus it has become a major pharmacological target.^3,4 In plants, molecular genetic studies have identified chaperones and co-chaperones as components of various physiological responses and are now starting to yield important information on how chaperones work. Notably, processes in plant innate immunity rely on the HSP70 and HSP90^5–7 chaperones as well as two recently characterised co-chaperones, RAR1 (required for Mla12 resistance) and SGT1 (suppressor of G₂ allele of skp1).^8–11SGT1 is a highly conserved and essential co-chaperone in eukaryotes and is organized into three structural domains: a tetratricopeptide repeat (TPR), a CHORD/SGT1 (CS) and an SGT1-specific (SGS) domain (Fig. 1A). SGT1 is involved in a number of apparently unrelated physiological responses ranging from cell cycle progression and adenylyl cyclase activity in yeast to plant immunity against pathogens, heat shock tolerance and plant hormone (auxin and jasmonic acid) signalling.^7–9,12,13 Because the SGT1 TPR domain is able to interact with Skp1, SGT1 was initially believed to be a component of SCF (Skp1/Cullin/F-box) E3 ubiquitin ligases that are important for auxin/JA signalling in plants and cell cycle progression in yeast.^13,14 However, mutagenesis of SGT1 revealed that the TPR domain is dispensable for plant immunity and auxin signalling.¹⁵ Also, SGT1-Skp1 interaction was not observed in Arabidopsis.¹³ More relevant to SGT1 functions appear to be the CS and SGS domains.¹⁶ The former is necessary and sufficient for RAR1 and HSP90 binding. The latter is the most conserved of all SGT1 domains and the site of numerous disabling mutations.^14,16,17Open in a separate windowFigure 1Model for SGT1/chaperone complex functions in the folding of LRR-containing proteins. (A) The structural domains of SGT1, their sites of action (above) and respective binding partners (below) are shown. N- and C-termini are indicated. TPR, tetratricopeptide repeat; CS, CHORD/SGT1; SGS, SGT1-specific. (B) Conceptual analogy between steroid receptor folding by the HOP/chaperone machinery and LRR protein folding by the SGT1/chaperone machinery. LRR motifs are overrepresented in processes requiring SGT1 such as plant immune receptor signalling, yeast adenylyl cyclase activity and plant or yeast SCF (Skp1/Cullin/F-box) E3 ubiquitin ligase activities. (C) Opposite forces drive LRR evolution. Structure of LRRs 16 to 18 of the F-box auxin receptor TIR1 is displayed as an illustration of the LRR folds.³⁰ Leucine/isoleucine residues (side chain displayed in yellow) are under strong purifying selection and build the hydrophobic LRR backbone (Left). By contrast, solvent-exposed residues of the β-strands define a polymorphic and hydrophilic binding surface conferring substrate specificity to the LRR (Right) and are often under diversifying selection.We recently demonstrated that Arabidopsis SGT1 interacts stably through its SGS domain with cytosolic/nuclear HSP70 chaperones.⁷ The SGS domain was both necessary and sufficient for HSP70 binding and mutations affecting SGT1-HSP70 interaction compromised JA/auxin signalling and immune responses. An independent in vitro study also found interaction between human SGT1 and HSP70.¹⁸ The finding that SGT1 protein interacts directly with two chaperones (HSP90/70) and one co-chaperone (RAR1) reinforces the notion that SGT1 behaves as a co-chaperone, nucleating a larger chaperone complex that is essential for eukaryotic physiology. A future challenge will be to dissect the chaperone network at the molecular and subcellular levels. In plant cells, SGT1 localization appears to be highly dynamic with conditional nuclear localization⁷ and its association with HSP90 was recently shown to be modulated in vitro by RAR1.¹⁶A co-chaperone function suits SGT1 diverse physiological roles better than a specific contribution to SCF ubiquitin E3 ligases. Because SGT1 does not affect HSP90 ATPase activity, SGT1 was proposed rather as a scaffold protein.^16,19 In the light of our findings and earlier studies,²⁰ SGT1 is reminiscent of HOP (Hsp70/Hsp90 organizing protein) which links HSP90 and HSP70 activities and mediates optimal substrate channelling between the two chaperones (Fig. 1B).²¹ While the contribution of the HSP70/HOP/HSP90 to the maturation of glucocorticoid receptors is well established,²¹ direct substrates of an HSP70/SGT1/HSP90 complex remain elusive.It is interesting that SGT1 appears to share a functional link with leucine-rich repeat- (LRR) containing proteins although LRR domains are not so widespread in eukaryotes. For example, plant SGT1 affects the activities of the SCF^TIR1 and SCF^COI1 E3 ligase complexes whose F-box proteins contain LRRs.¹³ Moreover, plant intracellular immune receptors comprise a large group of LRR proteins that recruit SGT1.^8,9 LRRs are also found in yeast adenylyl cyclase Cyr1p and the F-box protein Grr1p which is required for SGT1-dependent cyclin destruction during G₁/S transition.^12,14 Yeast 2-hybrid interaction assays also revealed that yeast and plant SGT1 tend to associate directly or indirectly with LRR proteins.^12,22,23 We speculate that SGT1 bridges the HSP90-HSC70 chaperone machinery with LRR proteins during complex maturation and/or activation. The only other structural motif linked to SGT1 are WD40 domains found in yeast Cdc4p F-box protein and SGT1 interactors identified in yeast two-hybrid screens.¹²What mechanisms underlie a preferential SGT1-LRR interaction? HSP70/SGT1/HSP90 may have co-evolved to assist specifically in folding and maturation of LRR proteins. Alternatively, LRR structures may have an intrinsically greater need for chaperoning activity to fold compared to other motifs. These two scenarios are not mutually exclusive. The LRR domain contains multiple 20 to 29 amino acid repeats, forming an α/β horseshoe fold.²⁴ Each repeat is rich in hydrophobic leucine/isoleucine residues which are buried inside the structure and form the structural backbone of the motif (Fig. 1C, left). Such residues are under strong purifying selection to preserve structure. These hydrophobic residues would render the LRR a possible HSP70 substrate.²⁵ By contrast, hydrophilic solvent- exposed residues of the β strands build a surface which confers ligand recognition specificity of the LRRs (Fig. 1C). In many plant immune receptors for instance, these residues are under diversifying selection that is likely to favour the emergence of novel pathogen recognition specificities in response to pathogen evolution.²⁶ The LRR domain of such a protein has to survive such antagonist selection forces and yet remain functional. Under strong selection pressure, LRR proteins might need to accommodate less stable LRRs because their recognition specificities are advantageous. This could be the point at which LRRs benefit most from a chaperoning machinery such as the HSP90/SGT1/HSP70 complex. This picture is reminiscent of the genetic buffering that HSP90 exerts on many traits to mask mutations that would normally be deleterious to protein folding and/or function, as revealed in Drosophila and Arabidopsis.²⁷ It will be interesting to test whether the HSP90/SGT1/HSP70 complex acts as a buffer for genetic variation, favouring the emergence of novel LRR recognition surfaces in, for example, highly co-evolved plant-pathogen interactions.^28,29     

Protein interactors of acyl-CoA-binding protein ACBP2 mediate cadmium tolerance in Arabidopsis

In our recent paper in the Plant Journal, we reported that Arabidopsis thaliana lysophospholipase 2 (lysoPL2) binds acyl-CoA-binding protein 2 (ACBP2) to mediate cadmium [Cd(II)] tolerance in transgenic Arabidopsis. ACBP2 contains ankyrin repeats that have been previously shown to mediate protein-protein interactions with an ethylene-responsive element binding protein (AtEBP) and a farnesylated protein 6 (AtFP6). Transgenic Arabidopsis ACBP2-overexpressors, lysoPL2-overexpressors and AtFP6-overexpressors all display enhanced Cd(II) tolerance, in comparison to wild type, suggesting that ACBP2 and its protein partners work together to mediate Cd(II) tolerance. Given that recombinant ACBP2 and AtFP6 can independently bind Cd(II) in vitro, they may be able to participate in Cd(II) translocation. The binding of recombinant ACBP2 to [¹⁴C]linoleoyl-CoA and [¹⁴C]linolenoyl-CoA implies its role in phospholipid repair. In conclusion, ACBP2 can mediate tolerance to Cd(II)-induced oxidative stress by interacting with two protein partners, AtFP6 and lysoPL2. Observations that ACBP2 also binds lysophosphatidylcholine (lysoPC) in vitro and that recombinant lysoPL2 degrades lysoPC, further confirm an interactive role for ACBP2 and lysoPL2 in overcoming Cd(II)-induced stress.Key words: acyl-CoA-binding protein, cadmium, hydrogen peroxide, lysophospholipase, oxidative stressAcyl-CoA-binding proteins (ACBP1 to ACBP6) are encoded by a multigene family in Arabidopsis thaliana.¹ These ACBP proteins are well studied in Arabidopsis in comparison to other organisms,^1–4 and are located in various subcellular compartments.¹ Plasma membranelocalized ACBP1 and ACBP2 contain ankyrin repeats that have been shown to function in protein-protein interactions.^5,6 ACBP1 and ACBP2 which share 76.9% amino acid identity also confer tolerance in transgenic Arabidopsis to lead [Pb(II)] and Cd(II), respectively.^1,5,7 Since recombinant ACBP1 and ACBP2 bind linolenoyl-CoA and linoleoyl-CoA in vitro, they may possibly be involved in phospholipid repair in response to heavy metal stress at the plasma membrane.^5,7 In contrast, ACBP3 is an extracellularly-localized protein⁸ while ACBP4, ACBP5 and ACBP6 are localized to cytosol.^9,10 ACBP1 and ACBP6 have recently been shown to be involved in freezing stress.^9,11 ACBP4 and ACBP5 bind oleoyl-CoA ester and their mRNA expressions are lightregulated.^12,13 Besides acyl-CoA esters, some ACBPs also bind phospholipids.^9,11,13 To investigate the biological function of ACBP2, we have proceeded to establish its interactors at the ankyrin repeats, including AtFP6,⁵ AtEBP⁶ and now lysoPL2 in the Plant Journal paper. While the significance in the interaction of ACBP2 with AtEBP awaits further investigations, some parallels can be drawn between those of ACBP2 with AtFP6 and with lysoPL2.     

Structural basis of transmembrane domain interactions in integrin signaling

Cell surface receptors of the integrin family are pivotal to cell adhesion and migration. The activation state of heterodimeric αβ integrins is correlated to the association state of the single-pass α and β transmembrane domains. The association of integrin αIIbβ3 transmembrane domains, resulting in an inactive receptor, is characterized by the asymmetric arrangement of a straight (αIIb) and tilted (β3) helix relative to the membrane in congruence to the dissociated structures. This allows for a continuous association interface centered on helix-helix glycine-packing and an unusual αIIb(GFF) structural motif that packs the conserved Phe-Phe residues against the β3 transmembrane helix, enabling αIIb(D723)β3(R995) electrostatic interactions. The transmembrane complex is further stabilized by the inactive ectodomain, thereby coupling its association state to the ectodomain conformation. In combination with recently determined structures of an inactive integrin ectodomain and an activating talin/β complex that overlap with the αβ transmembrane complex, a comprehensive picture of integrin bi-directional transmembrane signaling has emerged.Key words: cell adhesion, membrane protein, integrin, platelet, transmembrane complex, transmembrane signalingThe communication of biological signals across the plasma membrane is fundamental to cellular function. The ubiquitous family of integrin adhesion receptors exhibits the unusual ability to convey signals bi-directionally (outside-in and inside-out signaling), thereby controlling cell adhesion, migration and differentiation.^1–5 Integrins are Type I heterodimeric receptors that consist of large extracellular domains (>700 residues), single-pass transmembrane (TM) domains, and mostly short cytosolic tails (<70 residues). The activation state of heterodimeric integrins is correlated to the association state of the TM domains of their α and β subunits.^6–10 TM dissociation initiated from the outside results in the transmittal of a signal into the cell, whereas dissociation originating on the inside results in activation of the integrin to bind ligands such as extracellular matrix proteins. The elucidation of the role of the TM domains in integrin-mediated adhesion and signaling has been the subject of extensive research efforts, perhaps commencing with the demonstration that the highly conserved GFFKR sequence motif of α subunits (Fig. 1), which closely follows the first charged residue on the intracellular face, αIIb(K989), constrains the receptor to a default low affinity state.¹¹ Despite these efforts, an understanding of this sequence motif had not been reached until such time as the structure of the αIIb TM segment was determined.¹² In combination with the structure of the β3 TM segment¹³ and available mutagenesis data,^6,9,10,14,15 this has allowed the first correct prediction of the overall association of an integrin αβ TM complex.¹² The predicted association was subsequently confirmed by the αIIbβ3 complex structure determined in phospholipid bicelles,¹⁶ as well as by the report of a similar structure based on molecular modeling using disulfide-based structural constraints.¹⁷ In addition to the structures of the dissociated and associated αβ TM domains, their membrane embedding was defined^{12,13,16,18,19} and it was experimentally recognized that, in the context of the native receptor, the TM complex is stabilized by the inactive, resting ectodomain.¹⁶ These advances in integrin membrane structural biology are complemented by the recent structures of a resting integrin ectodomain and an activating talin/β cytosolic tail complex that overlap with the αβ TM complex,^20,21 allowing detailed insight into integrin bi-directional TM signaling.Open in a separate windowFigure 1Amino acid sequence of integrin αIIb and β3 transmembrane segments and flanking regions. Membrane-embedded residues^{12,13,16,18,19} are enclosed by a gray box. Residues 991–995 constitute the highly conserved GFFKR sequence motif of integrin α subunits.