Mps1 kinase regulates tumor cell viability via its novel role in mitochondria

Targeting mitotic kinase monopolar spindle 1 (Mps1) for tumor therapy has been investigated for many years. Although it was suggested that Mps1 regulates cell viability through its role in spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC), the underlying mechanism remains less defined. In an endeavor to reveal the role of high levels of mitotic kinase Mps1 in the development of colon cancer, we unexpectedly found the amount of Mps1 required for cell survival far exceeds that of maintaining SAC in aneuploid cell lines. This suggests that other functions of Mps1 besides SAC are also employed to maintain cell viability. Mps1 regulates cell viability independent of its role in cytokinesis as the genetic depletion of Mps1 spanning from metaphase to cytokinesis affects neither cytokinesis nor cell viability. Furthermore, we developed a single-cycle inhibition strategy that allows disruption of Mps1 function only in mitosis. Using this strategy, we found the functions of Mps1 in mitosis are vital for cell viability as short-term treatment of mitotic colon cancer cell lines with Mps1 inhibitors is sufficient to cause cell death. Interestingly, Mps1 inhibitors synergize with microtubule depolymerizing drug in promoting polyploidization but not in tumor cell growth inhibition. Finally, we found that Mps1 can be recruited to mitochondria by binding to voltage-dependent anion channel 1 (VDAC1) via its C-terminal fragment. This interaction is essential for cell viability as Mps1 mutant defective for interaction fails to main cell viability, causing the release of cytochrome c. Meanwhile, deprivation of VDAC1 can make tumor cells refractory to loss of Mps1-induced cell death. Collectively, we conclude that inhibition of the novel mitochondrial function Mps1 is sufficient to kill tumor cells.Massive chromosome missegregation induces cell death as observed by Theodor Boveri in the early 1900s.¹ However, the underlying mechanism remains elusive. The spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC) is a dominant machine monitoring chromosomal segregation during mitosis by delaying the onset of anaphase until all chromosomes are properly captured by microtubules. The SAC consists of kinetochore association sensors, including Mps1 (monopolar spindle 1), Bub1 (budding uninhibited by benzimidazole 1 homolog) and Aurora B; a signaling transducer termed the mitotic checkpoint complex (MCC), including CDC20 (cell division cycle 20), BubR1 (Bub1-related kinase), Bub3 (budding uninhibited by benzimidazole 3 homolog) and Mad2 (mitotic arrest deficient-like 2); and an effector APC/C (anaphase-promoting complex/cyclosome) that is inhibited by MCC in response to an active SAC.² Loss of SAC by inactivation of checkpoint sensors or signaling transducers elicits massive chromosome missegregation, induces severe gain or loss of chromosomes and eventually causes cell death.^{3, 4, 5, 6} Meanwhile, a weakened SAC due to the haploinsufficiency of the checkpoint proteins Mad1, Mad2, Bub1, BubR1 and CENP-E (centromere protein E) does not cause cell death but facilitates tumorigenesis.^{7, 8, 9, 10, 11} These studies suggest that the fate of these cells is dependent on their respective degree of SAC deficiency. Notably, in these studies SAC proteins were constitutively disturbed, raising the possibility that other signaling pathways could be affected as SAC proteins have functions beyond SAC regulation.^{12, 13, 14}Mps1 is an essential component of SAC that senses SAC signal by promoting MCC formation via kinetochore recruitment of Mad2, CENP-E and Knl1 (kinetochore-null protein 1).^{15, 16, 17, 18, 19} Recent studies show that Mps1 can discriminate between on or off SAC signaling by binding to NDC80c via the motif that associates microtubules.^{20, 21} Following SAC, Mps1 is involved in regulating chromosome alignment by phosphorylating Borealin, a component of chromosomal passenger complex (CPC).^{22, 23} In addition, Mps1 plays multiple roles beyond mitosis, including centrosome duplication, cytokinesis, ciliogenesis and DNA damage response.^{18, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28} Mps1 is indispensable for cell survival as loss of Mps1 function by specific siRNA or Mps1 kinase inhibitors causes significant cell death; it has been proposed that Mps1 regulates this process through its roles in SAC.^{29, 30, 31}Mps1 kinase is overexpressed in a variety of tumor types.^{32, 33, 34, 35} In breast cancer, high levels of Mps1 correlate with tumor grades; reducing Mps1 level induces massive apoptosis but allows a selective survival of tumor cells with less aneuploidy.³² Our recent results in colon cancer cells showed that overexpression of Mps1 facilitate the survival of tumor cells with higher aneuploidy by decreasing SAC threshold.³⁵ To further uncover the roles of high levels of Mps1 in tumorigenesis, we examined Mps1 levels in various stages of colon cancer tissues and found that Mps1 level peaks in tissues at stage II, at which stage tumor cells encounter various survival stresses, including genome instability. Aneuploid colon cancer cell lines bear higher levels of Mps1 than diploid cell lines and the amount of Mps1 required for cell survival is far more than that of maintaining SAC, suggesting that other functions of Mps1 are also employed to maintain cell viability. Short-term inhibition of Mps1 activity in mitosis with inhibitors at a dose of more than SAC depletion is sufficient to cause dividing cell death and increase mitochondrial fragmentation simultaneously. Finally, we found that Mps1 can regulate the release of cytochrome c by associating with mitochondrial protein VDAC1 (voltage-dependent anion channel 1). Based on these findings, we postulated that high levels of Mps1 contribute to survival of aneuploid cancer cells via its roles in SAC and mitochondria.     

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.     

PLASTID MOVEMENT IMPAIRED1 and PLASTID MOVEMENT IMPAIRED1-RELATED1 Mediate Photorelocation Movements of Both Chloroplasts and Nuclei

Organelle movement and positioning play important roles in fundamental cellular activities and adaptive responses to environmental stress in plants. To optimize photosynthetic light utilization, chloroplasts move toward weak blue light (the accumulation response) and escape from strong blue light (the avoidance response). Nuclei also move in response to strong blue light by utilizing the light-induced movement of attached plastids in leaf cells. Blue light receptor phototropins and several factors for chloroplast photorelocation movement have been identified through molecular genetic analysis of Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana). PLASTID MOVEMENT IMPAIRED1 (PMI1) is a plant-specific C2-domain protein that is required for efficient chloroplast photorelocation movement. There are two PLASTID MOVEMENT IMPAIRED1-RELATED (PMIR) genes, PMIR1 and PMIR2, in the Arabidopsis genome. However, the mechanism in which PMI1 regulates chloroplast and nuclear photorelocation movements and the involvement of PMIR1 and PMIR2 in these organelle movements remained unknown. Here, we analyzed chloroplast and nuclear photorelocation movements in mutant lines of PMI1, PMIR1, and PMIR2. In mesophyll cells, the pmi1 single mutant showed severe defects in both chloroplast and nuclear photorelocation movements resulting from the impaired regulation of chloroplast-actin filaments. In pavement cells, pmi1 mutant plants were partially defective in both plastid and nuclear photorelocation movements, but pmi1pmir1 and pmi1pmir1pmir2 mutant lines lacked the blue light-induced movement responses of plastids and nuclei completely. These results indicated that PMI1 is essential for chloroplast and nuclear photorelocation movements in mesophyll cells and that both PMI1 and PMIR1 are indispensable for photorelocation movements of plastids and thus, nuclei in pavement cells.In plants, organelles move within the cell and become appropriately positioned to accomplish their functions and adapt to the environment (for review, see Wada and Suetsugu, 2004). Light-induced chloroplast movement (chloroplast photorelocation movement) is one of the best characterized organelle movements in plants (Suetsugu and Wada, 2012). Under weak light conditions, chloroplasts move toward light to capture light efficiently (the accumulation response; Zurzycki, 1955). Under strong light conditions, chloroplasts escape from light to avoid photodamage (the avoidance response; Kasahara et al., 2002; Sztatelman et al., 2010; Davis and Hangarter, 2012; Cazzaniga et al., 2013). In most green plant species, these responses are induced primarily by the blue light receptor phototropin (phot) in response to a range of wavelengths from UVA to blue light (approximately 320–500 nm; for review, see Suetsugu and Wada, 2012; Wada and Suetsugu, 2013; Kong and Wada, 2014). Phot-mediated chloroplast movement has been shown in land plants, such as Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana; Jarillo et al., 2001; Kagawa et al., 2001; Sakai et al., 2001), the fern Adiantum capillus-veneris (Kagawa et al., 2004), the moss Physcomitrella patens (Kasahara et al., 2004), and the liverwort Marchantia polymorpha (Komatsu et al., 2014). Two phots in Arabidopsis, phot1 and phot2, redundantly mediate the accumulation response (Sakai et al., 2001), whereas phot2 primarily regulates the avoidance response (Jarillo et al., 2001; Kagawa et al., 2001; Luesse et al., 2010). M. polymorpha has only one phot that mediates both the accumulation and avoidance responses (Komatsu et al., 2014), although two or more phots mediate chloroplast photorelocation movement in A. capillus-veneris (Kagawa et al., 2004) and P. patens (Kasahara et al., 2004). Thus, duplication and functional diversification of PHOT genes have occurred during land plant evolution, and plants have gained a sophisticated light sensing system for chloroplast photorelocation movement.In general, movements of plant organelles, including chloroplasts, are dependent on actin filaments (for review, see Wada and Suetsugu, 2004). Most organelles common in eukaryotes, such as mitochondria, peroxisomes, and Golgi bodies, use the myosin motor for their movements, but there is no clear evidence that chloroplast movement is myosin dependent (for review, see Suetsugu et al., 2010a). Land plants have innovated a novel actin-based motility system that is specialized for chloroplast movement as well as a photoreceptor system (for review, see Suetsugu et al., 2010a; Wada and Suetsugu, 2013; Kong and Wada, 2014). Chloroplast-actin (cp-actin) filaments, which were first found in Arabidopsis, are short actin filaments specifically localized around the chloroplast periphery at the interface between the chloroplast and the plasma membrane (Kadota et al., 2009). Strong blue light induces the rapid disappearance of cp-actin filaments and then, their subsequent reappearance preferentially at the front region of the moving chloroplasts. This asymmetric distribution of cp-actin filaments is essential for directional chloroplast movement (Kadota et al., 2009; Kong et al., 2013a). The greater the difference in the amount of cp-actin filaments between the front and rear regions of chloroplasts becomes, the faster the chloroplasts move, in which the magnitude of the difference is determined by fluence rate (Kagawa and Wada, 2004; Kadota et al., 2009; Kong et al., 2013a). Strong blue light-induced disappearance of cp-actin filaments is regulated in a phot2-dependent manner before the intensive polymerization of cp-actin filaments at the front region occurs (Kadota et al., 2009; Ichikawa et al., 2011; Kong et al., 2013a). This phot2-dependent response contributes to the greater difference in the amount of cp-actin filaments between the front and rear regions of chloroplasts. Similar behavior of cp-actin filaments has also been observed in A. capillus-veneris (Tsuboi and Wada, 2012) and P. patens (Yamashita et al., 2011).Like chloroplasts, nuclei also show light-mediated movement and positioning (nuclear photorelocation movement) in land plants (for review, see Higa et al., 2014b). In gametophytic cells of A. capillus-veneris, weak light induced the accumulation responses of both chloroplasts and nuclei, whereas strong light induced avoidance responses (Kagawa and Wada, 1993, 1995; Tsuboi et al., 2007). However, in mesophyll cells of Arabidopsis, strong blue light induced both chloroplast and nuclear avoidance responses, but weak blue light induced only the chloroplast accumulation response (Iwabuchi et al., 2007, 2010; Higa et al., 2014a). In Arabidopsis pavement cells, small numbers of tiny plastids were found and showed autofluorescence under the confocal laser-scanning microscopy (Iwabuchi et al., 2010; Higa et al., 2014a). Hereafter, the plastid in the pavement cells is called the pavement cell plastid. Strong blue light-induced avoidance responses of pavement cell plastids and nuclei were induced in a phot2-dependent manner, but the accumulation response was not detected for either organelle (Iwabuchi et al., 2007, 2010; Higa et al., 2014a). In both Arabidopsis and A. capillus-veneris, phots mediate nuclear photorelocation movement, and phot2 mediates the nuclear avoidance response (Iwabuchi et al., 2007, 2010; Tsuboi et al., 2007). The nuclear avoidance response is dependent on actin filaments in both mesophyll and pavement cells of Arabidopsis (Iwabuchi et al., 2010). Recently, it was shown that the nuclear avoidance response relies on cp-actin-dependent movement of pavement cell plastids, where nuclei are associated with pavement cell plastids of Arabidopsis (Higa et al., 2014a). In mesophyll cells, nuclear avoidance response is likely dependent on cp-actin filament-mediated chloroplast movement, because the mutants deficient in chloroplast movement were also defective in nuclear avoidance response (Higa et al., 2014a). Thus, phots mediate both chloroplast (and pavement cell plastid) and nuclear photorelocation movement by regulating cp-actin filaments.Molecular genetic analyses of Arabidopsis mutants deficient in chloroplast photorelocation movement have identified many molecular factors involved in signal transduction and/or motility systems as well as those involved in the photoreceptor system for chloroplast photorelocation movement (and thus, nuclear photorelocation movement; for review, see Suetsugu and Wada, 2012; Wada and Suetsugu, 2013; Kong and Wada, 2014). CHLOROPLAST UNUSUAL POSITIONING1 (CHUP1; Oikawa et al., 2003) and KINESIN-LIKE PROTEIN FOR ACTIN-BASED CHLOROPLAST MOVEMENT (KAC; Suetsugu et al., 2010b) are key factors for generating and/or maintaining cp-actin filaments. Both proteins are highly conserved in land plants and essential for the movement and attachment of chloroplasts to the plasma membrane in Arabidopsis (Oikawa et al., 2003, 2008; Suetsugu et al., 2010b), A. capillus-veneris (Suetsugu et al., 2012), and P. patens (Suetsugu et al., 2012; Usami et al., 2012). CHUP1 is localized on the chloroplast outer membrane and binds to globular and filamentous actins and profilin in vitro (Oikawa et al., 2003, 2008; Schmidt von Braun and Schleiff, 2008). Although KAC is a kinesin-like protein, it lacks microtubule-dependent motor activity but has filamentous actin binding activity (Suetsugu et al., 2010b). An actin-bundling protein THRUMIN1 (THRUM1) is required for efficient chloroplast photorelocation movement (Whippo et al., 2011) and interacts with cp-actin filaments (Kong et al., 2013a). chup1 and kac mutant plants were shown to lack detectable cp-actin filaments (Kadota et al., 2009; Suetsugu et al., 2010b; Ichikawa et al., 2011; Kong et al., 2013a). Similarly, cp-actin filaments were rarely detected in thrum1 mutant plants (Kong et al., 2013a), indicating that THRUM1 also plays an important role in maintaining cp-actin filaments.Other proteins J-DOMAIN PROTEIN REQUIRED FOR CHLOROPLAST ACCUMULATION RESPONSE1 (JAC1; Suetsugu et al., 2005), WEAK CHLOROPLAST MOVEMENT UNDER BLUE LIGHT1 (WEB1; Kodama et al., 2010), and PLASTID MOVEMENT IMPAIRED2 (PMI2; Luesse et al., 2006; Kodama et al., 2010) are involved in the light regulation of cp-actin filaments and chloroplast photorelocation movement. JAC1 is an auxilin-like J-domain protein that mediates the chloroplast accumulation response through its J-domain function (Suetsugu et al., 2005; Takano et al., 2010). WEB1 and PMI2 are coiled-coil proteins that interact with each other (Kodama et al., 2010). Although web1 and pmi2 were partially defective in the avoidance response, the jac1 mutation completely suppressed the phenotype of web1 and pmi2, suggesting that the WEB1/PMI2 complex suppresses JAC1 function (i.e. the accumulation response) under strong light conditions (Kodama et al., 2010). Both web1 and pmi2 showed impaired disappearance of cp-actin filaments in response to strong blue light (Kodama et al., 2010). However, the exact molecular functions of these proteins are unknown.In this study, we characterized mutant plants deficient in the PMI1 gene and two homologous genes PLASTID MOVEMENT IMPAIRED1-RELATED1 (PMIR1) and PMIR2. PMI1 was identified through molecular genetic analyses of pmi1 mutants that showed severe defects in chloroplast accumulation and avoidance responses (DeBlasio et al., 2005). PMI1 is a plant-specific C2-domain protein (DeBlasio et al., 2005; Zhang and Aravind, 2010), but its roles and those of PMIRs in cp-actin-mediated chloroplast and nuclear photorelocation movements remained unclear. Thus, we analyzed chloroplast and nuclear photorelocation movements in the single, double, and triple mutants of pmi1, pmir1, and pmir2.     

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

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

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

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

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.