Arabidopsis RTE1 is essential to ethylene receptor ETR1 amino-terminal signaling independent of CTR1

The Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) ethylene receptor Ethylene Response1 (ETR1) can mediate the receptor signal output via its carboxyl terminus interacting with the amino (N) terminus of Constitutive Triple Response1 (CTR1) or via its N terminus (etr1^1-349 or the dominant ethylene-insensitive etr1-1^1-349) by an unknown mechanism. Given that CTR1 is essential to ethylene receptor signaling and that overexpression of Reversion To Ethylene Sensitivity1 (RTE1) promotes ETR1 N-terminal signaling, we evaluated the roles of CTR1 and RTE1 in ETR1 N-terminal signaling. The mutant phenotype of ctr1-1 and ctr1-2 was suppressed in part by the transgenes etr1^1-349 and etr1-1^1-349, with etr1-1^1-349 conferring ethylene insensitivity. Coexpression of 35S:RTE1 and etr1^1-349 conferred ethylene insensitivity in ctr1-1, whereas suppression of the ctr1-1 phenotype by etr1^1-349 was prevented by rte1-2. Thus, RTE1 was essential to ETR1 N-terminal signaling independent of the CTR1 pathway. An excess amount of the CTR1 N terminus CTR1^7-560 prevented ethylene receptor signaling, and the CTR1^7-560 overexpressor CTR1-Nox showed a constitutive ethylene response phenotype. Expression of the ETR1 N terminus suppressed the CTR1-Nox phenotype. etr1^1-349 restored the ethylene insensitivity conferred by dominant receptor mutant alleles in the ctr1-1 background. Therefore, ETR1 N-terminal signaling was not mediated by full-length ethylene receptors; rather, full-length ethylene receptors acted cooperatively with the ETR1 N terminus to mediate the receptor signal independent of CTR1. ETR1 N-terminal signaling may involve RTE1, receptor cooperation, and negative regulation by the ETR1 carboxyl terminus.The gaseous plant hormone ethylene is perceived by a small family of ethylene receptors. Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) has five ethylene receptors that are structurally similar to prokaryotic two-component histidine kinase (HK) proteins. Mutants defective in multiple ethylene receptor genes show a constitutive ethylene response phenotype, which indicates a negative regulation of ethylene responses by the receptor genes (Hua and Meyerowitz, 1998).The receptor N terminus has three or four transmembrane domains that bind ethylene. The GAF (for cGMP-specific phosphodiesterases, adenylyl cyclases, and FhlA) domain, which follows the transmembrane helices, mediates noncovalent receptor heterodimerization and may have a role in receptor cooperation (Gamble et al., 2002; O’Malley et al., 2005; Xie et al., 2006; Gao et al., 2008). The subfamily I receptors Ethylene Response1 (ETR1) and Ethylene Response Sensor1 (ERS1) have a conserved HK domain following the GAF domain. For subfamily II members ETR2, Ethylene Insensitive4 (EIN4), and ERS2, the HK domain is less conserved, and they lack most signature motifs essential for HK activity (Chang et al., 1993; Gamble et al., 1998; Hua et al., 1998; Qu and Schaller, 2004; Xie et al., 2006). Among the five receptors, ETR1, ETR2, and EIN4 have a receiver domain following the HK domain. The ETR1 HK domain may have a role in mediating the receptor signal to downstream components, and the HK activity facilitates the ethylene signaling (Clark et al., 1998; Huang et al., 2003; Hall et al., 2012). The receiver domain can dimerize and could involve receptor cooperation (Müller-Dieckmann et al., 1999). However, differential receptor cooperation occurs between the receiver domain-lacking ERS1 and the other ethylene receptors, which does not support the hypothesis that the domains involve receptor cooperation (Liu and Wen, 2012).Acting downstream of the ethylene receptors is Constitutive Triple Response1 (CTR1), a MEK kinase (mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase kinase) with Ser/Thr kinase activity, and the kinase domain locates at the C terminus. The CTR1 N terminus does not share sequence similarity to known domains and can physically interact with the ethylene-receptor HK domain (Clark et al., 1998; Huang et al., 2003). ctr1 mutants showing attenuated CTR1 kinase activity or the ETR1-CTR1 association exhibit various degrees of the constitutive ethylene-response phenotype. For example, the ctr1-1 and ctr1^btk mutations result from the D694E and E626K substitutions, respectively, in the CTR1 kinase domain, and ctr1-1 shows a stronger ethylene-response phenotype than ctr1^btk, with ctr1-1 having much weaker kinase activity than ctr1^btk (Kieber et al., 1993; Huang et al., 2003; Ikeda et al., 2009). The ctr1-8 mutation results in the G354E substitution that prevents the ETR1-CTR1 association, and the mutant exhibits a constitutive ethylene-response phenotype. Overexpression of the CTR1 N terminus CTR1^7-560, which is responsible for interaction with ethylene receptors, leads to constitutive ethylene responses, possibly by titrating out available ethylene receptors (Kieber et al., 1993; Huang et al., 2003). These studies suggest that CTR1 kinase activity and the interaction of CTR1 with the receptor HK domain may be important to the ethylene receptor signal output in suppressing constitutive ethylene responses.Although the ETR1-CTR1 interaction via the HK domain is essential to the ethylene receptor signal output, evidence suggests that the ETR1 receptor signal output can also be independent of the HK activity or domain. The etr1 ers1 loss-of-function mutant displays extreme growth defects. The etr1HGG] mutation inactivates ETR1 HK activity, and expression of the getr1HGG] transgene rescues the etr1 ers1 growth defects, which indicates a lack of association of ETR1 receptor signaling and its kinase activity (Wang et al., 2003). The dominant etr1-1 mutation results in the C65Y substitution and confers ethylene insensitivity (Chang et al., 1993), and the expression of the HK domain-lacking etr1^1-349 and ethylene-insensitive etr1-1^1-349 isoforms partially suppresses the growth defects of etr1 ers1-2. Loss-of-function mutations of subfamily II members do not affect etr1-1^1-349 functions. Therefore, etr1-1^1-349 predominantly cooperates with subfamily I receptors to mediate the ethylene receptor signal output (Xie et al., 2006). Biochemical and transformation studies showing that ethylene receptors can form heterodimers and that each receptor is a component of high-molecular-mass complexes explain how ethylene receptors may act cooperatively (Gao et al., 2008; Gao and Schaller, 2009; Chen et al., 2010).Reversion To Ethylene Sensitivity1 (RTE1), a Golgi/endoplasmic reticulum protein, was isolated from a suppressor screen of the dominant ethylene-insensitive etr1-2 mutation. The cross-species complementation of the rte1-2 loss-of-function mutation by the rice (Oryza sativa) RTE Homolog1 (OsRTH1) suggests a conserved mechanism that modulates the ethylene receptor signaling across higher plant species (Zhang et al., 2012). RTE1 and OsRTH1 overexpression led to ethylene insensitivity in wild-type Arabidopsis but not the etr1-7 loss-of-function mutant, and expression of etr1^1-349 restored ethylene insensitivity with RTE1 overexpression in etr1-7 (Resnick et al., 2006; Zhou et al., 2007; Zhang et al., 2010). Coimmunoprecipitation of epitope-tagged ETR1 and RTE1 and Trp fluorescence spectroscopy revealed the physical interaction of RTE1 and ETR1 (Zhou et al., 2007; Dong et al., 2008, 2010). Therefore, RTE1 may directly promote ETR1 receptor signal output through the ETR1 N terminus, but whether RTE1 has an essential role in ETR1 N-terminal signaling remains to be addressed.Currently, the biochemical nature of the ethylene receptor signal is unknown, and the underlying mechanisms of mediation of the ethylene receptor signal output remain uninvestigated. Genetic and biochemical studies suggest that activation of CTR1 by ethylene receptors may suppress constitutive ethylene responses; upon ethylene binding, the receptors are converted to an inactive state and fail to activate CTR1, and the suppression of ethylene responses by CTR1 is alleviated (Hua and Meyerowitz, 1998; Klee, 2004; Wang et al., 2006; Hall et al., 2007). However, this model does not address how the ETR1 N terminus, which does not have the CTR1-interacting site, mediates the receptor signal to suppress constitutive ethylene responses. The receptor signal of the truncated etr1 isoforms may be mediated by other full-length ethylene receptors and then activate CTR1; alternatively, the ETR1 N-terminal signal may be mediated by a pathway independent of CTR1 (Gamble et al., 2002; Qu and Schaller, 2004; Xie et al., 2006). Results showing that mutants defective in multiple ethylene receptor genes exhibit a more severe ethylene-response phenotype than ctr1 and that ctr1 mutants are responsive to ethylene support the presence of a CTR1-independent pathway (Hua and Meyerowitz, 1998; Cancel and Larsen, 2002; Huang et al., 2003; Liu et al., 2010).In this study, we investigated whether mediation of ETR1 N-terminal signaling is independent of CTR1 and whether RTE1 is essential to the CTR1-independent ETR1 N-terminal signaling. The ETR1 N-terminal signaling was not mediated via other full-length ethylene receptors, but the signal of full-length ethylene receptors could be mediated by the ETR1 N terminus independent of CTR1. The ETR1 C terminus may inhibit ETR1 N-terminal signaling, whereby deletion of the C terminus facilitates N-terminal signaling. We propose a model for the possible modulation of ETR1 receptor signaling.