Hypoxia: A novel function for VIN3

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

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     

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.     

Indolic secondary metabolites protect Arabidopsis from the oomycete pathogen Phytophthora brassicae

The model plant Arabidopsis thaliana contains a large arsenal of secondary metabolites that are not essential in development but have important ecological functions in counteracting attacks of pathogens and herbivores.^1,2 Preformed secondary compounds are often referred to as phytoanticipins and metabolites, that are synthesized de novo in response to biotic stress are known as phytoalexins.³ Camalexin is the typical phytoalexin of Arabidopsis. It has antimicrobial activity towards some pathogens and was shown to be an important component of disease resistance in several plant pathogen interactions.⁴ Glucosinolates (GS) are characteristic phytoanticipins of the Brassicaceae family including Arabidopsis. GS are best known as repellents or attractants for herbivorous insects and their predators whereas their antimicrobial potential has received relatively little attention.⁵ The GS are glucosides and the biologically active aglycone is released upon biotic stress by glucohydrolase enzymes commenly called myrosinases. Because an Arabidopsis mutant susceptible to the oomycete pathogen Phytophthora brassicae shows a partial deficiency in both camalexin and iGS accumulation we became intrigued by the role of these secondary compounds in disease resistance.^6,7 Our results show that disease resistance of Arabidopsis to P. brassicae is established by the combined action of iGS and camalexin.Key words: Arabidopsis, disease resistance, Phytophthora brassicae, secondary metabolites, indolic glucosinolates, camalexin     

High-throughput transient transformation of Arabidopsis roots enables systematic colocalization analysis of GFP-tagged proteins

Determination of the subcellular localization of an unknown protein is a major step towards the elucidation of its function. Lately, the expression of proteins fused to fluorescent markers has been very popular and many approaches have been proposed to express these proteins. Stable transformation using Agrobacterium tumefaciens generates stable lines for downstream experiments, but is time-consuming. If only colocalization is required, transient techniques save time and effort. Several methods for transient assays have been described including protoplast transfection, biolistic bombardment, Agrobacterium tumefaciens cocultivation and infiltration. In general colocalizations are preferentially performed in intact tissues of the same species, resembling the native situation. High transformation rates were described for cotyledons of Arabidopsis, but never for roots. Here we report that it is possible to transform Arabidopsis root epidermal cells with an efficiency that is sufficient for colocalization purposes.Key words: Arabidopsis, GFP-fusions, protein localization, root, transient transformationSince the release of the Arabidopsis thaliana genome sequence plant biologists set the goal to elucidate the functions of all coded genes. Apart from the spatio-temporal expression patterns of genes, the subcellular localization of gene products can play an essential role in deciphering their function. Classical immunological approaches to localize proteins can be hindered by cross-reactivity, time-consuming generation of antibodies and the low temporal resolution. Expression of tagged proteins forms a suitable alternative. Lately, fusions with fluorescent proteins in combination with confocal (CLSM)¹ or spinning disc microscopy² allow real time protein localization and even subcellular trafficking at high resolution. An overview of fluorescent tagging approaches can be found elsewhere.³Currently several techniques to introduce the coding region for a tagged protein in a plant are available. The generation of stable lines transformed by Agrobacterium tumefaciens offers a continuous source of plant material, but it is time-consuming especially when only colocalization experiments are required. Transient assays, on the other hand, offer the advantage of being fast and amenable to high throughput strategies. Each of these techniques, however, has some limitations and drawbacks. Particle bombardment (biolistics) ^4–6 for example circumvents the host specificity of Agrobacterium strains, but requires expensive equipment. Moreover, it is rather disruptive and imposes a significant stress upon the plants, possibly influencing the results. Protoplasts lack a cell wall and protoplast transformation^7,8 is therefore not suitable for certain experiments related to cell wall proteins or when interactions between cells on tissue level might be important.⁹ Moreover, protoplasts have lost their identity which might be critical for the correct functioning of certain transgenic constructs. Agrobacterium infiltration of tobacco leaves¹⁰ is regularly used and represents an efficient, fast and relatively easy transformation technique. However, tobacco leaves easily show autofluoresence due to tissue damage as a result of experimental manipulations. As it has been reported that some protein fusions expressed in an heterologous system localize to different subcellular localizations11 it is advisable not to use tobacco when localizing Arabidopsis proteins. Leaf infiltrations have been performed in Arabidopsis,¹² but apparently their leaves are much more prone to mechanical damage and the leaf developmental stage is critical, complicating this technique. Cocultivation of Agrobacterium with seedlings offers a rapid and efficient approach applicable to many mono and dicot species. It was reported to work efficiently in Arabidopsis cotyledons, but not in roots.⁹ As an alternative method, Agrobacterium infiltration of Arabidopsis seedlings¹¹ seems an efficient technique for transient expression. However, expression in root cells could not be obtained. Colocalizations are required in the native cells or tissue for the correct localization of an unknown protein or proteins that need interaction partners. As a consequence this technique can not be reliably used when root expressed gene products are studied. Here we show evidence that it is possible to use the described technique¹¹ to induce transient expression in Arabidopsis roots.We used the Agrobacterium infiltration of Arabidopsis seedlings technique¹¹ to colocalize several C-terminal (S65T)-sGFP fusions generated in the plant binary vector pGWB6.¹³ Each construct was transformed into Agrobacterium tumefaciens (C59C1Rif^R) containing the helper plasmid pMP90. Subsequently different stable marker lines, wild type Arabidopsis (Col-0) bearing mCherry fusion constructs,¹⁴ were transiently transformed.¹¹ After 2 or 3 days seedlings were studied using CLSM. Besides being expressed in cotyledons fusion proteins were clearly observed in root epidermis and root cap cells (Fig. 1A and B). As reported¹¹ the transformation efficiency in cotyledons was considerably higher than in root cells. However, in each experiment we obtained a considerable amount of transformed root epidermal cells which was more than sufficient for colocalization studies (Fig. 2). It was remarkable that transformation was repeatedly successful in groups of cells, adjacent or close to each other.Open in a separate windowFigure 1Transient transformation of Arabidopsis root cells. Expression of the protein-GFP fusion product can be seen in the epidermal (A) and root cap cells (B) on fluorescence/transmission merged images. As seen in (A) high efficiencies of root transformation can be reached.Open in a separate windowFigure 2Colocalization of mCherry and GFP constructs. Confocal image of the mCherry fluorescence (A), the GFP signal (B) and the merged image (C).In contrast to what was reported earlier we show here that the Agrobacterium infiltration technique¹¹ is perfectly capable of transiently transforming Arabidopsis root epidermal cells. It allows the transient production and study of proteins in their native environment, considerably increasing the reliability of such experiments. Additionaly the use of RFP marker constructs in colocalisation studies in the root is free of interference by the red background autofluorescence of chlorophyll.     

Human non-CG methylation: Are human stem cells plant-like?

Non-CG methylation is well characterized in plants where it appears to play a role in gene silencing and genomic imprinting. Although strong evidence for the presence of non-CG methylation in mammals has been available for some time, both its origin and function remain elusive. In this review we discuss available evidence on non-CG methylation in mammals in light of evidence suggesting that the human stem cell methylome contains significant levels of methylation outside the CG site.Key words: non-CG methylation, stem cells, Dnmt1, Dnmt3a, human methylomeIn plant cells non-CG sites are methylated de novo by Chromomethylase 3, DRM1 and DRM2. Chromomethylase 3, along with DRM1 and DRM2 combine in the maintenance of methylation at symmetric CpHpG as well as asymmetric DNA sites where they appear to prevent reactivation of transposons.¹ DRM1 and DRM2 modify DNA de novo primarily at asymmetric CpH and CpHpH sequences targeted by siRNA.²Much less information is available on non-CG methylation in mammals. In fact, studies on mammalian non-CG methylation form a tiny fraction of those on CG methylation, even though data for cytosine methylation in other dinucleotides, CA, CT and CC, have been available since the late 1980s.³ Strong evidence for non-CG methylation was found by examining either exogenous DNA sequences, such as plasmid and viral integrants in mouse and human cell lines,^4,5 or transposons and repetitive sequences such as the human L1 retrotransposon⁶ in a human embryonic fibroblast cell line. In the latter study, non-CG methylation observed in L1 was found to be consistent with the capacity of Dnmt1 to methylate slippage intermediates de novo.⁶Non-CG methylation has also been reported at origins of replication^7,8 and a region of the human myogenic gene Myf3.⁹ The Myf3 gene is silenced in non-muscle cell lines but it is not methylated at CGs. Instead, it carries several methylated cytosines within the sequence CCTGG. Gene-specific non-CG methylation was also reported in a study of lymphoma and myeloma cell lines not expressing many B lineage-specific genes.¹⁰ The study focused on one specific gene, B29 and found heavy CG promoter methylation of that gene in most cell lines not expressing it. However, in two other cell lines where the gene was silenced, cytosine methylation was found almost exclusively at CCWGG sites. The authors provided evidence suggesting that CCWGG methylation was sufficient for silencing the B29 promoter and that methylated probes based on B29 sequences had unique gel shift patterns compared to non-methylated but otherwise identical sequences.¹⁰ The latter finding suggests that the presence of the non-CG methylation causes changes in the proteins able to bind the promoter, which could be mechanistically related to the silencing seen with this alternate methylation.Non-CG methylation is rarely seen in DNA isolated from cancer patients. However, the p16 promoter region was reported to contain both CG and non-CG methylation in breast tumor specimens but lacked methylation at these sites in normal breast tissue obtained at mammoplasty.¹¹ Moreover, CWG methylation at the CCWGG sites in the calcitonin gene is not found in normal or leukemic lymphocyte DNA obtained from patients.¹² Further, in DNA obtained from breast cancer patients, MspI sites that are refractory to digestion by MspI and thus candidates for CHG methylation were found to carry CpG methylation.¹³ Their resistance to MspI restriction was found to be caused by an unusual secondary structure in the DNA spanning the MspI site that prevents restriction.¹³ This latter observation suggests caution in interpreting EcoRII/BstNI or EcoRII/BstOI restriction differences as due to CWG methylation, since in contrast to the 37°C incubation temperature required for full EcoRII activity, BstNI and BstOI require incubation at 60°C for full activity where many secondary structures are unstable.The recent report by Lister et al.¹⁴ confirmed a much earlier report by Ramsahoye et al.¹⁵ suggesting that non-CG methylation is prevalent in mammalian stem cell lines. Nearest neighbor analysis was used to detect non-CG methylation in the earlier study on the mouse embryonic stem (ES) cell line,¹⁵ thus global methylation patterning was assessed. Lister et al.¹⁴ extend these findings to human stem cell lines at single-base resolution with whole-genome bisulfite sequencing. They report¹⁴ that the methylome of the human H1 stem cell line and the methylome of the induced pluripotent IMR90 (iPS) cell line are stippled with non-CG methylation while that of the human IMR90 fetal fibroblast cell line is not. While the results of the two studies are complementary, the human methylome study addresses locus specific non-CG methylation. Based on that data,¹⁴ one must conclude that non-CG methylation is not carefully maintained at a given site in the human H1 cell line. The average non-CG site is picked up as methylated in about 25% of the reads whereas the average CG methylation site is picked up in 92% of the reads. Moreover, non-CG methylation is not generally present on both strands and is concentrated in the body of actively transcribed genes.¹⁴Even so, the consistent finding that non-CG methylation appears to be confined to stem cell lines,^14,15 raises the possibility that cancer stem cells¹⁶ carry non-CG methylation while their nonstem progeny in the tumor carry only CG methylation. Given the expected paucity of cancer stem cells in a tumor cell population, it is unlikely that bisulfite sequencing would detect non-CG methylation in DNA isolated from tumor cells since the stem cell population is expected to be only a very minor component of tumor DNA. Published sequences obtained by bisulfite sequencing generally report only CG methylation, and to the best of our knowledge bisulfite sequenced tumor DNA specimens have not reported non-CG methylation. On the other hand, when sequences from cell lines have been reported, bisulfite-mediated genomic sequencing⁸ or ligation mediated PCR¹⁷ methylcytosine signals outside the CG site have been observed. In a more recent study plasmid DNAs carrying the Bcl2-major breakpoint cluster¹⁸ or human breast cancer DNA¹³ treated with bisulfite under non-denaturing conditions, cytosines outside the CG side were only partially converted on only one strand¹⁸ or at a symmetrical CWG site.¹³ In the breast cancer DNA study the apparent CWG methylation was not detected when the DNA was fully denatured before bisulfite treatment.¹³In both stem cell studies, non-CG methylation was attributed to the Dnmt3a,^14,15 a DNA methyltransferase with similarities to the plant DRM methyltransferase family¹⁹ and having the capacity to methylate non-CG sites when expressed in Drosophila melanogaster.¹⁵ DRM proteins however, possess a unique permuted domain structure found exclusively in plants¹⁹ and the associated RNA-directed non-CG DNA methylation has not been reproducibly observed in mammals despite considerable published^20–23 and unpublished efforts in that area. Moreover, reports where methylation was studied often infer methylation changes from 5AzaC reactivation studies²⁴ or find that CG methylation seen in plants but not non-CG methylation is detected.^21,22,25,26 In this regard, it is of interest that the level of non-CG methylation reported in stem cells corresponds to background non-CG methylation observed in vitro with human DNA methyltransferase I,²⁷ and is consistent with the recent report that cultured stem cells are epigenetically unstable.²⁸The function of non-CG methylation remains elusive. A role in gene expression has not been ruled out, as the studies above on Myf3 and B29 suggest.^9,10 However, transgene expression of the bacterial methyltransferase M.EcoRII in a human cell line (HK293), did not affect the CG methylation state at the APC and SerpinB5 genes²⁹ even though the promoters were symmetrically de novo methylated at ^mCWGs within each CCWGG sequence in each promoter. This demonstrated that CG and non-CG methylation are not mutually exclusive as had been suggested by earlier reports.^9,10 That observation is now extended to the human stem cell line methylome where CG and non-CG methylation co-exist.¹⁴ Gene expression at the APC locus was likewise unaffected by transgene expression of M.EcoRII. In those experiments genome wide methylation of the CCWGG site was detected by restriction analysis and bisulfite sequencing,²⁹ however stem cell characteristics were not studied.Many alternative functions can be envisioned for non-CG methylation, but the existing data now constrains them to functions that involve low levels of methylation that are primarily asymmetric. Moreover, inheritance of such methylation patterns requires low fidelity methylation. If methylation were maintained with high fidelity at particular CHG sites one would expect that the spontaneous deamination of 5-methylcytosine would diminish the number of such sites, so as to confine the remaining sites to those positions performing an essential function, as is seen in CG methylation.^30–33 However, depletion of CWG sites is not observed in the human genome.³⁴ Since CWG sites account for only about 50% of the non-CG methylation observed in the stem cell methylome¹⁴ where methylated non-CG sites carry only about 25% methylation, the probability of deamination would be about 13% of that for CWG sites that are subject to maintenance methylation in the germ line. Since mutational depletion of methylated cytosines has to have its primary effect on the germ line, if the maintenance of non-CG methylation were more accurate and more widespread, one would have had to argue that stem cells in the human germ lines lack CWG methylation. As it is the data suggests that whatever function non-CG methylation may have in stem cells, it does not involve accurate somatic inheritance in the germ line.The extensive detail on non-CG methylation in the H1 methylome¹⁴ raises interesting questions about the nature of this form of methylation in human cell lines. A key finding in this report is the contrast between the presence of non-CG methylation in the H1 stem cell line and its absence in the IMR90 human fetal lung fibroblast cell line.¹⁴ This suggests that it may have a role in the origin and maintenance of the pluripotent lineage.¹⁴By analogy with the well known methylated DNA binding proteins specific for CG methylation,³⁵ methylated DNA binding proteins that selectively bind sites of non-CG methylation are expected to exist in stem cells. Currently the only protein reported to have this binding specificity is human Dnmt1.^36–38 While Dnmt1 has been proposed to function stoichiometrically³⁹ and could serve a non-CG binding role in stem cells, this possibility and the possibility that other stem-cell specific non-CG binding proteins might exist remain to be been explored.Finally, the nature of the non-CG methylation patterns in human stem cell lines present potentially difficult technical problems in methylation analysis. First, based on the data in the H1 stem cell methylome,⁴⁰ a standard MS-qPCR for non-CG methylation would be impractical because non-CG sites are infrequent, rarely clustered and are generally characterized by partial asymmetric methylation. This means that a PCR primer that senses the 3 adjacent methylation sites usually recommended for MS-qPCR primer design^41,42 cannot be reliably found. For example in the region near Oct4 (Chr6:31,246,431), a potential MS-qPCR site exists with a suboptimal set of two adjacent CHG sites both methylated on the + strand at Chr6:31,252,225 and 31,252,237.^14,40 However these sites were methylated only in 13/45 and 30/52 reads. Thus the probability that they would both be methylated on the same strand is about 17%. Moreover, reverse primer locations containing non-CG methylation sites are generally too far away for practical bisulfite mediated PCR. Considering the losses associated with bisulfite mediated PCR⁴³ the likelihood that such an MS-qPCR system would detect non-CG methylation in the H1 cell line or stem cells present in a cancer stem cell niche^44,45 is very low.The second difficulty is that methods based on the specificity of MeCP2 and similar methylated DNA binding proteins for enriching methylated DNA (e.g., MIRA,⁴⁶ COMPARE-MS⁴⁷) will discard sequences containing non-CG methylation since they require cooperative binding afforded by runs of adjacent methylated CG sites for DNA capture. This latter property of the methylated cytosine capture techniques makes it also unlikely that methods based on 5-methylcytosine antibodies (e.g., meDIP⁴⁸) will capture non-CG methylation patterns accurately since the stem cell methylome shows that adjacent methylated non-CG sites are rare in comparison to methylated CG sites.¹⁴In summary, whether or not mammalian stem cells in general or human stem cells in particular possess functional plant-like methylation patterns is likely to continue to be an interesting and challenging question. At this point we can conclude that the non-CG patterns reported in human cells appear to differ significantly from the non-CG patterns seen in plants, suggesting that they do not have a common origin or function.     

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.     

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     

Tuba and N-WASP function cooperatively to position the central lumen during epithelial cyst morphogenesis

The process of epithelial lumenogenesis requires coordination of a network of signaling machinery communicated to each cell through subsequent cell divisions. Formation of a single hollow lumen has previously been shown to require Tuba, a Cdc42 GEF, for Cdc42 activation and correct spindle orientation. Using a Caco-2 model of lumenogenesis, we show that knockdown (KD) of the actin regulator N-WASP, causes a multilumen phenotype similar to Tuba KD. Defects in lumenogenesis in Tuba KD and N-WASP KD cells are observed at the two-cell stage with inappropriate marking of the pre-apical patch (PAP )—the precursor to lumen formation. Strikingly, both Tuba and N-WASP depend on each other for localization to the PAP. We conclude that N-WASP functions cooperatively with Tuba to facilitate lumenogenesis and this requires the polyproline region of N-WASP.Key words: lumen, N-WASP, tuba, E-cadherin, pre-apical patchMany epithelial tissues are organized as hollow tubes whose open lumina connect the body with its external environment.^1,2 These tubes consist of a monolayer of polarized cells that envelope the central lumen. Lumen formation is thus a key process in epithelial morphogenesis that depends upon cell polarity to establish three cell surface domains: a basal surface adherent to the extracellular matrix, a lateral surface between cells, and an apical surface that is exposed to the luminal fluids. Of note, the apical membrane is biochemically and morphologically distinct from the baso-lateral surfaces and effectively defines the luminal surface.^3,4For a lumen to form, cells must first mark the site at which apical membrane is to be inserted, something that is achieved at the first cell division.⁵ Targeted trafficking of apical membrane constituents defines a pre-apical patch (PAP), the precursor to the definitive lumen.⁵ Such insertion of apical membrane must presumably be coordinated with the assembly of apical junctions to segregate nascent apical from lateral membrane domains.² Subsequent cell divisions direct apical membrane and protein constituents to this point of initial apical membrane placement.⁶ Coordinated luminal positioning enables the initial formation of a single hollow lumen that subsequently expands through polarized fluid secretion to separate apical membranes, such as occurs in the embryonic gastrointestinal tract,⁷ or by apoptosis or autophagy of the central cells as is observed in mammary gland development.^8,9 Failure to establish initial luminal positioning causes defective lumenogenesis, often resulting in multiple, morphologically abnormal lumina.^5,6Crucial to lumenal morphogenesis is then the mechanism(s) that mark the site where the PAP will form. Cdc42 signaling is increasingly implicated in this process,^2,10 with downstream consequences that include control of mitotic spindle orientation,⁵ which itself influences PAP placement⁵ and potentially regulation of cell-cell junctions. Like other Rho family GTPases, the subcellular location of Cdc42 signaling is determined by the action of upstream proteins, notably guanine nucleotide exchange factors (GEFs).^11,12 Of these, Tuba, a Cdc42-specific GEF,¹³ has emerged as a regulator of lumenal morphogenesis that controls PAP placement through mitotic spindle orientation.¹⁰Tuba is also a scaffolding protein¹³ capable of linking the actin assembly machinery with trafficking pathways. Not only is Tuba required for Cdc42 activation to direct spindle orientation,⁵ it also has the potential to interact with phosphoinositides that define the PAP.¹⁴ Additionally, Tuba binds directly to the actin regulator N-WASP, a key molecule in the organization of actin and itself a Cdc42 effector.¹⁵ Further, Tuba and N-WASP cooperate in various forms of actin-driven cellular motility, such as vesicle propulsion and cell invasive behavior.¹⁶ Interestingly, in epithelial cells N-WASP is also found at cadherin-based cell-cell junctions.¹⁷ In fact it has been proposed that N-WASP functions downstream of Tuba in the maintenance of epithelial junctional homeostasis as N-WASP overexpression was capable of rescuing a Tuba KD phenotype.¹⁸ Therefore, Tuba has the potential to play a central role in coordinating the molecular complexes required for productive polarization of epithelial cells and placement of the PAP during lumenogenesis. However, whether other protein interactions contribute to the morphogenetic impact of Tuba remain to be assessed.Three-dimensional cell culture systems are being utilized to identify critical components in lumen formation. In particular, Madin-Darby canine kidney cells (MDCK) and Caco-2 gastrointestinal cells are commonly used to study cyst and/or tubule formation. MDCK cells undergo both cyst and tubule growth, apoptosis being primarily responsible for the final step in lumen formation,¹⁹ while Caco-2 cells primarily utilize fluid influx to expand cysts.⁵ Cyst culture systems replicate aspects of in vivo organogenesis²⁰ providing tangible, powerful models to analyze and dissect the coordinated cellular mechanisms and processes that occur during epithelial morphogenesis.In this study we examined the relationship between Tuba and N-WASP in early epithelial lumenogenesis using Caco-2 three dimensional cyst cultures. Both Tuba and N-WASP RNAi cell lines result in mature cysts with multiple lumina, and at the two-cell stage, formed multiple PAPs. Interestingly, N-WASP KD perturbed Tuba localization at the PAP, however, N-WASP localization to the PAP was not affected to the same extent by Tuba KD. Taken together, these results suggest a complex interrelationship between Tuba and N-WASP for the coordinated formation of a single hollow lumen.     

Strigolactones: Internal and external signals in plant symbioses?

As the newest plant hormone, strigolactone research is undergoing an exciting expansion. In less than five years, roles for strigolactones have been defined in shoot branching, secondary growth, root growth and nodulation, to add to the growing understanding of their role in arbuscular mycorrhizae and parasitic weed interactions.¹ Strigolactones are particularly fascinating as signaling molecules as they can act both inside the plant as an endogenous hormone and in the soil as a rhizosphere signal.^2-4 Our recent research has highlighted such a dual role for strigolactones, potentially acting as both an endogenous and exogenous signal for arbuscular mycorrhizal development.⁵ There is also significant interest in examining strigolactones as putative regulators of responses to environmental stimuli, especially the response to nutrient availability, given the strong regulation of strigolactone production by nitrate and phosphate observed in many species.^5,6 In particular, the potential for strigolactones to mediate the ecologically important response of mycorrhizal colonization to phosphate has been widely discussed. However, using a mutant approach we found that strigolactones are not essential for phosphate regulation of mycorrhizal colonization or nodulation.⁵ This is consistent with the relatively mild impairment of phosphate control of seedling root growth observed in Arabidopsis strigolactone mutants.⁷ This contrasts with the major role for strigolactones in phosphate control of shoot branching of rice and Arabidopsis^8,9 and indicates that the integration of strigolactones into our understanding of nutrient response will be complex. New data presented here, along with the recent discovery of phosphate specific CLE peptides,¹⁰ indicates a potential role for PsNARK, a component of the autoregulation of nodulation pathway, in phosphate control of nodulation.     

Plasmodesmata transport of GFP and GFP fusions requires little energy and transitions during leaf expansion

Plasmodesmata (Pd) are symplastic channels between neighboring plant cells and are key in plant cell-cell signaling. Viruses of proteins, nucleic acids, and a wide range of signaling macromolecules move across Pd. Protein transport Pd is regulated by development and biotic signals. Recent investigations utilizing the Arrhenius equation or Coefficient of conductivity showed that fundamental energetic measurements used to describe transport of proteins across membrane pores or the nuclear pore can also apply to protein movement across Pd. As leaves continue to expand, Pd transport of proteins declines which may result from changes in cell volume, Pd density or Pd structure.Key words: plasmodesmata, diffusion, GFP, viral transport, PVX, triple gene blockResearchers have argued for the last decade that movement of proteins and other macromolecules across Pd is regulated by development, stress and biotic signals. There are four current models describing different mechanisms of Pd transport. First is the non cell autonomous protein (NCAP) pathway that carries ribonucleoprotein complexes across Pd. NCAPs often carry RNA in a ribonucleoprotein complex to the Pd.^1–4 This mode of transport involved targeted movement, meaning that a set of proteins must dock within the Pd to gate it open to enable transfer between cells. Proteins which are normally too large to move across Pd can gate open Pd to enable its own transfer into neighboring cells. This is contrasted by nontargetted movement, which is passive movement of proteins that are sufficiently small enough to pass between cells.^5,6 The green fluorescent protein (GFP) has been described as a protein whose movement is non-targeted, meaning that it can diffuse across Pd. Reasons that we do not see continuous movement of small proteins between cells include protein compartmentalization or subcellular targeting signals. For example proteins may be synthesized and modified via the ER and Golgi networks and then transferred into vesicles and transported within cells to their destination. These proteins would not be free in the cytosol for diffusion across Pd. Alternatively, proteins which have dominant subcellular targeting signals which direct them to certain organelles such as the nucleus, peroxisome, or other destination would not be free to move across Pd.^5,6 A third model represents proteins in the ER that move laterally along the membrane or through the ER lumen into neighboring cells. This transport is quite rapid and investigations are ongoing to determine how this is regulated.^7–11 Finally, there is vesicle transport which deliver cargo to Pd.^12,13 The origin of these vesicles is still under investigation. Much more research has been accomplished toward defining non-targeted movement and the NCAP pathway while the ER and vesicle transport pathways are only recently described and very little is known about the regulatory mechanisms underlying these pathways.Pd permeability is governed in part by architecture, but also by key regulatory factors that determine Pd conductivity. Factors such as mysoin VIII, actin and calreticulin were identified in Pd which likely regulate expansion and contraction.^14–19 In addition calcium, ATP and plant hormones can downregulate Pd permeability during development and stress.^20,21 The tools for measuring Pd permeability has been to study the transport of fluorescently tagged proteins, fluorescent dextran beads, GFP or GFP fusions following microinjection or biolistic delivery to the cytoplasm of one cell.^22–26 Then video imaging or captured still images at select time intervals are used to characterize Pd transport. Until recently researchers quantified movement by the frequency they observed a certain type of movement. Therefore our ability to describe Pd permeability has been limited.Evidence that ATP impacts Pd conductivity has led investigations to explore the energy requirements for macromolecular transport across Pd. By understanding the energy requirements for transport of various proteins and nucleic acids we can better characterize passive or active transport processes. Toward this end two recent studies detailed quantitative approaches that can be employed to describe the developmental and energy requirements cell-to-cell transport of cytosolic proteins. Both papers used biolistic bombardment to deliver plasmids expressing GFP or GFP fusions to tobacco leaf epidermal cells and then captured still images of GFP fluorescence in neighboring cells. We employed the Arrhenius equation to characterize transport of GFP or GFP fused to the Potato virus X (PVX) TGBp1 movement protein. PVX TGBp1 was selected to compare with GFP alone since it is known to gate open Pd and has ATPase activity.⁴⁵ We predicted that the abilities of GFP alone and GFP-TGBp1 to move across Pd might be different and were surprised to learn that the energy for transport of both proteins was similar. This project established the principle that GFP and GFP-TGBp1 transport is temperature dependent showing a linear relationship between protein movement and the temperatures at which leaves were incubated.Green fluorescent sites on bombarded leaves were scored for the movement or no movement. Movement is defined as evidence of fluorescence in 2 or more cells at 24 h and no movement is when fluorescence is in single cells. These were then presented as a percentage of the total. So by digitizing the representation of movement we were able to represent a linear relationship between movement and temperature. Representing movement in this way also enabled us to represent movement values on a logarithm scale necessary for a classic Arrhenius plot. The activation energy (Ea) was calculated by fitting the data to the Arrhenius equation:% movement = A exp(-Ea/RT); and the Ea for GFP and GFP-TGBp1 was approximately 38 kJ/mol and 29 kJ/mol. These low activation energies are comparable to the reported 30 kJ/mol calculated for temperature dependence of protein transport through the cytosol. Evidence that GFP movement across Pd requires slightly more energy than through the cytoplasm suggests there may be some resistance within the pore. The lower energy for GFP-TGBp1 suggests that movement is facilitated, which likely reflects Pd gating by TGBp1, enabling greater transfer between cells.Liarzi and Epel define a new coefficient of conductivity of Pd.⁴² This study also concluded that cell-to-cell transport of GFP in nontransgenic or transgenic N. benthamiana plants expressing the Tobacco mosaic virus (TMV) movement protein (MP) is temperature dependent. The method was to measure the exponential decay, which is a measure of the impedance to diffusion driven cell-to-cell movement of fluorescence. The exponential decay factor? was determined by calculating the ratio of GFP fluorescence in bombarded cell 0 and neighboring cells. This was presented as a measure of fluorescence transfer from cell 0 to cell 1 to cell 2. A coefficient for conductivity C(Pd), 1/? for GFP was reflective of diffusion. Interestingly the (TMV) MP did not increase conductivity of GFP between neighboring leaf epidermal cells indicating that movement was already maximal. Considering prior reports that the TMV MP shows preferential spread into mesophyll rather than epidermal tissues during virus infection, it is possible that preferential spread into mesophyll cells would prevent experimental efforts to achieve improved conductivity of GFP between epidermal cells.^27,28 In which case the absence of a trans effect of TMV MP on GFP conductivity in the epidermis may not be surprising. In fact, prior investigations of TMV MP gating activities were conducted in mesophyll cells.^29,30 The best explanation for the combined studies is that cytosolic GFP can diffuse across Pd , however viral proteins which gate Pd enable their own low energy transfer into neighboring cells without allowing other proteins to flood into neighboring cells. Therefore viral movement proteins, such as PVX TGBp1 and TMV MP, which gate Pd provide themselves with an energetic advantage for transport into neighboring cells which is essential for rapid dissemination of virus into further tissues.These studies provide an interesting contrast between PVX TGBp1 and TMV MP. Both proteins gate open Pd for virus cell-to-cell transport, but there seems to be differences in how these proteins function in epidermal cells. This is likely due to their different roles in promoting virus cell-to-cell movement. PVX TGBp1 protein is also a suppressor of RNA silencing. We recently proposed a model in which TGBp1 rapidly moves from cell-to-cell ahead of virus infection, to suppress the cell''s RNA degradation machinery, as a means to promote infection.³¹ The TMV MP on the other hand is reported to bind viral RNA for transfer into neighboring cells.^32,33 Therefore, the different observations of PVX TGBp1 and TMV MP transport between epidermal cells likely reflect their functional differences. Both proteins are required for virus cell-to-cell movement, but their exact roles in virus movement are not identical.As mentioned earlier, Pd permeability is downregulated during plant development. Research tracking GFP diffusion through Pd in embryonic cells, in young emerging leaves, and in fully expanded leaves showed that fluorescence is highly mobile between cells in young tissues but is restricted during maturation. Viral movement proteins such as Cucumber mosaic virus 3a, and PVX TGBp1 remain highly mobile in mature leaves because they gate open Pd under conditions that normally restrict movement of GFP.^34,35 Schoenknecht et al., undertook a straightforward investigation of leaf maturation describing Pd transport in relationship to leaf area expansion. The outcome of this study was evidence that GFP movement between cells declines as leaves expand.It is reasonable to consider that simultaneous changes in gene expression and physiology is reflected in a downward trend in Pd conductivity and an increased requirement for Pd gating to enable selected transport of macromolecules between cells. In Arabidopsis embryos there is an obvious transition between developmental stages which are also represented by a decline in the ability for GFP to diffuse across Pd.^36,37 A detailed analysis of Pd structure in source and sink tissues revealed that Pd are simple single channeled structures in sink tissues while source tissues contain predominantly “H” shaped branching Pd structures. The change in Pd structure has been correlated with changes in conductivity and is often correlated with changes in sink to source metabolism.^38,39 The sink-to-source transition in leaf development is typically monitored using phloem loading of carboxyfluorescein diacetate. Leaves where CF dye unloads are defined as sink leaves and leaves that were restricted in dye unloading were defined as source leaves. Then biolistic bombardment of GFP expressing plasmids to sink and source leaves revealed that GFP readily diffuses across Pd in sink leaves but is more often restricted in source leaves.^{26,34,40–42}Leaf development is typically defined as a transition from juvenile to adult which is represented by homeotic transformations as well as vegetative phase changes.^43,44 Source and sink regions of a leaf have been shown to correlate with changes in Pd structure and conductivity during leaf expansion. However, in our study we found that N. tabacum leaves identified as source during week 2 or 3 would continue to expand over an 8 week period to twice or three times the leaf area which provides a real indication that the source designation may not entirely reflect final leaf maturation or completion of leaf development.⁴⁵> For example, as cells transition from sink to source physiology it is suggested that the frequency of single channeled Pd declines while the frequency of branched Pd increases.³⁹ It is possible that even after leaves transition into photosynthetic sources that Pd architecture continues to change and there is a further decline in the proportion of single channel to branched channels. Therefore either the change in cell volume or Pd architecture or both can slow-down diffusion of GFP between cells.Researchers often point to the ER continuity between cells as a driving force for Pd formation and function. During cell division the cell wall is laid down and forms around the ER creating Pd channels.⁴⁶ However, it is also worth noting that the actin cytoskeleton is also present in Pd and is central to organ and reproductive development.^19,47 Actin and actin binding proteins are necessary for a number of plant processes determining the cell division plane, cell polarity, cell elongation, cytoplasmic streaming, transporting mRNAs and proteins, and defense.^48–51 Overexpression of ACT1 in Arabidopsis leaves can lead to changes in epidermal leaf shape and cause dwarfism in plants.⁵² Actin binding proteins are also necessary for organizing and remodeling the F-actin network which drives normal development of specific cell types and organs.⁵³ Actin filament bundling and remodeling are also seen in nonhost defense responses.⁵⁴ We do not know the effects of overexpressing certain actin homologues or actin remodeling on Pd formation or conductivity. Because the F-actin network is also central to Pd trafficking of proteins and macromolecules between cells it is worth considering F-actin as an early factor contributing to Pd formation which may be necessary to ensure cell-to-cell communication when cell polarity and elongation as well as defense machinery are being established.In summary, the novel quantitative tools developed for measuring protein movement across Pd reveal the temperature dependence of protein trafficking. Both the use of Arrhenius equation and C(Pd) provide new opportunities to measure the energy requirements for protein transport. These tools will enable researchers to quantify effects of environmental and developmental conditions on Pd conductivity, as well as comparing differences in Pd conductivity between plant species or induced by genetic mutations.