AvrRps4 effector family processing and recognition in lettuce

During pathogenesis, effector proteins are secreted from the pathogen to the host plant to provide virulence activity for invasion of the host. However, once the host plant recognizes one of the delivered effectors, effector‐triggered immunity activates a robust immune and hypersensitive response (HR). In planta, the effector AvrRps4 is processed into the N‐terminus (AvrRps4^N) and the C‐terminus (AvrRps4^C). AvrRps4^C is sufficient to trigger HR in turnip and activate AtRRS1/AtRPS4‐mediated immunity in Arabidopsis; on the other hand, AvrRps4^N induces HR in lettuce. Furthermore, AvrRps4^N‐mediated HR requires a conserved arginine at position 112 (R112), which is also important for full‐length AvrRps4 (AvrRps4^F) processing. Here, we show that effector processing and effector recognition in lettuce are uncoupled for the AvrRps4 family. In addition, we compared effector recognition by lettuce of AvrRps4 and its homologues, HopK1 and XopO. Interestingly, unlike for AvrRps4 and HopK1, mutation of the conserved R111 in XopO by itself was insufficient to abolish recognition. The combination of amino acid substitutions arginine 111 to leucine with glutamate 114 to lysine abolished the XopO‐mediated HR, suggesting that AvrRps4 family members have distinct structural requirements for perception by lettuce. Together, our results provide an insight into the processing and recognition of AvrRps4 and its homologues.     

Antispacer peptide nucleic acids for sequence-specific CRISPR-Cas9 modulation

Despite the rapid and broad implementation of CRISPR-Cas9-based technologies, convenient tools to modulate dose, timing, and precision remain limited. Building on methods using synthetic peptide nucleic acids (PNAs) to bind RNA with unusually high affinity, we describe guide RNA (gRNA) spacer-targeted, or ‘antispacer’, PNAs as a tool to modulate Cas9 binding and activity in cells in a sequence-specific manner. We demonstrate that PNAs rapidly and efficiently target complexed gRNA spacer sequences at low doses and without design restriction for sequence-selective Cas9 inhibition. We further show that short PAM-proximal antispacer PNAs achieve potent cleavage inhibition (over 2000-fold reduction) and that PAM-distal PNAs modify gRNA affinity to promote on-target specificity. Finally, we apply antispacer PNAs for temporal regulation of two dCas9-fusion systems. These results present a novel rational approach to nucleoprotein engineering and describe a rapidly implementable antisense platform for CRISPR-Cas9 modulation to improve spatiotemporal versatility and safety across applications.     

Comparing Accuracy of Wrist Intra-articular Needle Placement Via Ulnocarpal Approach by Training Level: A Cadaveric Study

BackgroundIntra-articular injections are a standard therapy and diagnostic tool for a variety of wrist conditions. Accurate needle placement is crucial for proper therapeutic benefit and prevention of complications. While some studies claim accurate needle placement requires imaging, others conclude that anatomical guidance is sufficient. This study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of intra-articular wrist needle placement with the ulnocarpal approach across differing levels of training using clinical anatomy alone.MethodsFourteen fresh-frozen, above-elbow cadaveric specimens were used. Intra-articular needle placement into the wrist via an ulnocarpal approach was attempted by nine study participants: two interns, two junior-level residents, two senior-level residents, two hand fellows, and one attending hand surgeon. Each injection was performed based on clinical examination and landmarks alone. The number of attempts and total time taken for each injection was recorded.ResultsOverall success rate was 71%, (89 of 126 attempts) and did not vary significantly across levels of training. Average time for needle placement among all participants was 10.9 ± 6.5 seconds. Timing of successful intra-articular needle placement (10.4 ± 5.2 seconds) significantly differed between levels. However, timing did not trend in any direction with more or less training. No significant difference was noted in total attempts or attempts with successful outcomes when comparing level of training.ConclusionThe ulnocarpal approach is a viable option for injection or aspiration of the wrist without image guidance. We were unable to show any relevant trends with timing or number of attempts in comparison to level of training. Level of Evidence: V