Seediscussions,stats,andauthorprofilesforthispublicationat:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26891169
ALesion-MimicSyntaxinDoubleMutantinArabidopsisRevealsNovelComplexityofPathogenDefenseSignaling
ArticleinMolecularPlant·May2008
DOI:10.1093/mp/ssn011·Source:PubMed
CITATIONS
38
READS
82
10authors,including:
Someoftheauthorsofthispublicationarealsoworkingontheserelatedprojects:
SignalsintheSea:theeffectofcopepodamidesonplanktoncommunitystructureandfunctioningView
project
MolecularmechanismofcellcycleViewproject
ZiguoZhang
UniversityofCambridge
87PUBLICATIONS3,409CITATIONS
SEEPROFILE
MatsXAndersson
UniversityofGothenburg
61PUBLICATIONS1,620CITATIONS
SEEPROFILE
CarstenPedersen
UniversityofCopenhagen
77PUBLICATIONS1,350CITATIONS
SEEPROFILE
Mari-AnneNewman
UniversityofCopenhagen
62PUBLICATIONS3,837CITATIONS
SEEPROFILE
AllcontentfollowingthispagewasuploadedbyCarstenPedersenon03December2016.
Theuserhasrequestedenhancementofthedownloadedfile.Allin-textreferencesunderlinedinblueareaddedtotheoriginaldocumentandarelinkedtopublicationsonResearchGate,lettingyouaccessandreadthemimmediately.
Molecular Plant • Volume 1 • Number 3 • Pages 510–527 • May 2008 RESEARCH ARTICLE
A Lesion-Mimic Syntaxin Double Mutant inArabidopsis Reveals Novel Complexity ofPathogen Defense Signaling
Ziguo Zhanga, Andrea Lenka,Mats X. Anderssona, Torben Gjettingb, Carsten Pedersena,Mads E. Nielsena,d,Mari-Anne Newmanc, Bi-Huei Houb, Shauna C. Somervilleb and Hans Thordal-Christensena,1
a Plant and Soil Science, Dept of Agricultural Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Thorvaldsensvej 40, DK-1871 Frederiksberg C,Denmarkb Dept of Plant Biology, Carnegie Institution, Stanford, CA 94305, USAc Plant Pathology, Dept of Plant Biology, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Thorvaldsensvej 40, DK-1871 Frederiksberg C, Denmarkd Research Laboratory, Carlsberg Research Center, Gl. Carlsbergvej 10, DK-2500 Valby, Copenhagen, Denmark
ABSTRACT The lesion-mimic Arabidopsismutant, syp121 syp122, constitutively expresses the salicylic acid (SA) signaling
pathway and has low penetration resistance to powdery mildew fungi. Genetic analyses of the lesion-mimic phenotype
have expanded our understanding of programmed cell death (PCD) in plants. Inactivation of SA signaling genes in syp121
syp122 only partially rescues the lesion-mimic phenotype, indicating that additional defenses contribute to the PCD.Whole
genome transcriptome analysis confirmed that SA-induced transcripts, as well as numerous other known pathogen-
response transcripts, are up-regulated after inactivation of the syntaxin genes. A suppressor mutant analysis of syp121
syp122 revealed that FMO1, ALD1, and PAD4 are important for lesion development. Mutant alleles of EDS1, NDR1,
RAR1, and SGT1b also partially rescued the lesion-mimic phenotype, suggesting that mutating syntaxin genes
stimulates TIR-NB-LRR and CC-NB-LRR-type resistances. The syntaxin double knockout potentiated a powdery mildew-
induced HR-like response. This required functional PAD4 but not functional SA signaling. However, SA signaling poten-
tiated the PAD4-dependent HR-like response. Analyses of quadruple mutants suggest that EDS5 and SID2 confer separate
SA-independent signaling functions, and that FMO1 and ALD1 mediate SA-independent signals that are NPR1-dependent.
These studies highlight the contribution of multiple pathways to defense and point to the complexity of their interactions.
INTRODUCTION
Plants have developed several different inducible defense
mechanisms against microbial pathogens. These defenses
are controlled by a number of signaling cascades. The best de-
scribed are the salicylic acid (SA), jasmonic acid (JA) and ethyl-
ene (ET) signaling pathways (Glazebrook, 2005). Signaling
components in each of these pathways have been discovered
primarily through mutant screens in Arabidopsis thaliana
(Durrant and Dong, 2004; Glazebrook, 2005; Beckers and
Spoel, 2006; Broekaert et al., 2006). However, the different
pathways do not function independently. The SA pathway,
for instance, can act antagonistically to the JA pathway. This
antagonism requires the SA-activated NPR1 (Spoel et al.,
2003). Disease resistance is manifested downstream of these
signaling pathways, through the expression of proteins that
counteract the invading pathogen. In addition to SA-, JA-,
and ET-regulated defenses, a major defense mechanism is
the hypersensitive necrosis response (HR). This pathogen-
induced programmed cell death (PCD) of one or more host
cells confers effective protection against biotrophic patho-
gens, which require living host tissue for their survival. The
HR is an important element of resistance (R) gene-mediated
resistance (Glazebrook, 2005).
Mutants that constitutively express defense responses,
many of which are lesion-mimic mutants with spontaneous
PCD, have been essential for unraveling defense signaling
pathways (Lorrain et al., 2003). Most of these mutations are
recessive, suggesting that their wild-type alleles encode neg-
ative regulators of defense signaling. Many of the lesion-
mimic mutants have more than one permanently activated
signaling pathway. However, the SA pathway often predomi-
nates in part due to its suppression of other pathways. There-
fore, when the SA pathway is silenced in lesion-mimic mutants,
1 To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail [email protected],
fax +45 35333460, tel +45 35333443.
ª The Author 2008. Published by the Molecular Plant Shanghai Editorial
Office in association with Oxford University Press on behalf of CSPP and
IPPE, SIBS, CAS.
doi: 10.1093/mp/ssn011, Advance Access publication 15 April 2008
up-regulation of the JA and ET pathways is often observed
(Clarke et al., 2000). The spontaneous PCD in lesion-mimic
mutants is often used as a model for HR-cell death reactions.
However, while R-gene-mediated HR appears to be stimulated
by SA (Rairdan and Delaney, 2002; Raffaele et al., 2006), the role
of SA in spontaneous PCD is ambiguous. There are examples of
both SA-dependent (Brodersen et al., 2005; Torres et al., 2005)
and SA-independent spontaneous PCD (Hunt et al., 1997).
Plants have developed a specific mechanism to block entry
of fungi that attack by penetrating through the plant epider-
mal cell wall. In Arabidopsis, we identified a series of pen
mutants that are compromised in penetration resistance to
the non-adapted barley powdery mildew fungus (Blumeria
graminis f.sp. hordei, Bgh) (Collins et al., 2003; Lipka et al.,
2005; Stein et al., 2006). Cloning of the Arabidopsis PEN1 gene
and the homologous barley ROR2 gene showed that they
encoded SYP121 syntaxins (Collins et al., 2003). SYP121 is local-
ized in the plasma membrane and was subsequently found to
be required for timely formation of the cell wall appositions,
which are important for this defense (Assaad et al., 2004).
Syntaxins are essential proteins of the SNARE machinery, con-
trolling vesicle traffic and bulk transport of cargo in cells (Lipka
et al., 2007). SYP121 is thought to influence the secretion
of components required for formation of pathogen-induced
cell wall appositions.
We have recently demonstrated that syntaxin double
mutants, of any of four alleles of syp121 and a T-DNA insertion
allele of syp122, become dwarfed and develop severe necrosis
after a period of 2–3 weeks of normal growth. These lesion-
mimic plants are affected in several different pathogen de-
fense pathways. The syntaxin double mutants lack penetration
resistance to powdery mildew fungi. At the same time, the SA,
JA, and ETsignaling pathways, as well as a pathway that poten-
tiates an HR-like defense to powdery mildew fungi, are
elevated in syp121 syp122 plants (Zhang et al., 2007). The
enhanced SA signaling is responsible for a significant part,
but not all, of the lesion-mimic phenotype. The powdery
mildew-triggered HR-like response appears to be independent
of the SA signaling pathway based on studies in which muta-
tions in SA signaling genes are introduced one by one. This re-
sponse, which may also contribute to the lesion-mimic
phenotype, occurs after attack by either Bgh or the virulent
powdery mildew fungus (Golovinomyces cichoracearum, Gc).
The response provides complete resistance to Gc (Zhang et
al., 2007). Other data implicating syntaxins in pathogen de-
fense include the demonstration that SYP121 and SYP122
are phosphorylated in response to flg22, an elicitor of basal
defenses (Nuhse et al., 2003; Benschop et al., 2007), and that
a closely related tobacco syntaxin is phosphorylated during
R-gene-mediated resistance (Heese et al., 2005). In addition,
tobacco SYP132 is involved in resistance to bacteria and secre-
tion of antimicrobial proteins (Kalde et al., 2007).
Our previous work has shown that silencing the SA pathway,
using mutations in genes for SA signal components, does not
fully rescue the necrosis and dwarfism in the syntaxin double
mutant. Here, we report a detailed survey of the defense sig-
naling in syp121 syp122 indicating that multiple defense path-
ways are active in this mutant. In addition, we show that
different pathways lead to the spontaneous cell death and
to the pathogen-triggered cell death reactions. Using global
transcript profiling, we show that many SA responses and
other defense-related transcripts are induced after mutation
of SYP121 and SYP122. We observe rescuing effects of muta-
tions in a number of well-described defense pathways, indicat-
ing that these are active in the syntaxin double mutant. We
also demonstrate that SID2 and EDS5, which are key elements
in SA biosynthesis, each have additional roles in defense sig-
naling. We provide evidence that the recently described
FMO1 and ALD1-defined pathways contribute to the pheno-
type independent of SA. However, we propose that these
pathways share the NPR1 signaling node. We present data sug-
gesting R-gene-mediated signaling contributes to the syntaxin
double mutant phenotypes and that the ET pathway may serve
to protect against necrosis development. These results empha-
size the importance of syntaxins in defense and establish the
syntaxin double mutant as a useful tool for studying defense
signaling networks.
RESULTS
Defense-Related Transcripts Are Up-Regulated as a Result
of Mutations in SYP121 and SYP122
A global transcript profiling experiment was performed to fur-
ther characterize the activated defense signaling in the syn-
taxin double mutant, syp121 syp122. Gene expression was
assayed in three biological replicates of wild-type Col-0,
syp121–1, syp122–1, and syp121–1 syp122–1 plants at
2.5 weeks of age, prior to the appearance of visible spontane-
ous lesions. Affymetrix ATH1 GeneChips, carrying 22 500 probe
sets, were used (Redman et al., 2004). Two-way ANOVA anal-
ysis identified 596 genes up-regulated (P < 0.001) in the syn-
taxin double mutant relative to wild-type, with 365 of these
being up-regulated more than two-fold. These 365 genes
and their fold change in the syp121 syp122 double mutant rel-
ative to wild-type are listed in Supplemental Table 1. One gene
(At3g30720) was also up-regulated in both of the syntaxin sin-
gle mutants, syp121–1 and syp122–1, relative to wild-type. This
gene, which encodes a unique 59 amino acid-protein of un-
known function, was up-regulated five-fold in syp121–1 and
13-fold in syp122–1. The At3g30720 transcript was the only
one to be significantly up-regulated in syp122–1. Remarkably,
this is also the only gene which was significantly constitutively
up-regulated in the pen3 mutant (Stein et al., 2006). The
syp121–1 mutation was associated with the up-regulation of
another six genes, one of which was SYP122. Interestingly,
only one gene (At4g30140) was found to be significantly
(P < 0.001) down-regulated (about three-fold) in syp121–1
syp122–1 compared to wild-type. This gene encodes a lipase/
hydrolase with a GDSL-motif.
Zhang et al. d syp121 syp122 Unravels Signaling Network | 511
We used the Meta-Analyzer tool from Genevestigator
(www.genevestigator.ethz.ch; Zimmermann et al., 2004) for
a more detailed analysis of the 365 genes up-regulated two-
fold or more. We calculated the mean of log2 of the change
in expression of these 365 genes for each of the 83 categories
in the Meta-Analyzer. For ten of the 83 categories, mean log2
values exceed 1, suggesting that the genes identified in our
experiment are also frequently up-regulated in other stress-
related experiments (Table 1). The gene expression profile
of ozone-treated plants is most similar to that of the syp121
syp122 mutant, with 328 of the 365 genes up-regulated
two-fold or more in response to ozone. This reactive oxygen
moleculehas beenreportedto induce anHR-likePCD(Overmyer
et al., 2000). The overlapping response suggests a high
similarity of the spontaneous PCD of syp121 syp122 and
ozone-induced PCD. Moreover, the ten matching categories
also include inoculation with Botrytis cinerea, Phytophthora
infestans, and Erysiphe cichoracearum (= Gc). The two
necrotrophic pathogens, B. cinerea and P. infestans, elicit
up-regulation of 241 and 273 of the 365 genes, respectively.
Even though the powdery mildew fungus, Gc, does not in-
duce cell death, it surprisingly elicits up-regulation of 285 of
the 365 genes. As expected, SA treatment was found among
the ten categories and this hormone up-regulates 232 of the
365 genes. Subsequently, we assessed the expression patterns
of the 365 genes in published Arabidopsis transcriptomics
data (Table 2). R-gene-mediated responses to Pseudomonas
syringae pv. tomato DC3000 (Pst) (Bartsch et al., 2006) of
the 365 genes were highly similar to those observed in
the syntaxin double mutant. When resistance is mediated
by RPM1 or RPS4, 223 and 200, respectively, of the 365 genes
are up-regulated. Of the 365 genes, 188 are up-regulated in
response to attack by virulent Pst (www.genevestigator.
ethz.ch). These observations suggest that at the 2.5-weeks
time-point, the syntaxin double mutant is preparing for
the initiation of PCD, which becomes visible a few days later.
Furthermore, the similarity to the response of plants inocu-
lated with avirulent Pst strains may suggest that R-gene
defenses are constitutively activated in the syntaxin double
mutant. This is supported below by the observation that
the R-gene signaling genes, PAD4, EDS1, NDR1, SGT1b,
and RAR1, are partially responsible for the spontaneous
lesion-mimic phenotype of syp121 syp122.
We also evaluated whether pathogen-associated molecular
pattern (PAMP)-induced defenses were activated in the syn-
taxin double mutant by assessing the expression of the 365
genes in plants following treatments with various PAMPs. Of
the 365 genes, 162 responded to chitin (www.genevestigator.
ethz.ch), 50 to Escherichia coli and 59 to Pst hrpA (Thilmony et
al., 2006) (see Table 2). The hrpA mutation of Pst eliminates the
secretion of effectors, which otherwise interfere with PAMP-
induced signaling. Even though these numbers are lower than
those for PCD-inducing stresses (see above), they suggest that
PAMP-like responses are also activated in the syp121 syp122
mutant.
In our previous analyses of the syntaxin double mutant, we
found that alleviating the SA signaling in syp121 syp122 by in-
troducing SA signaling mutations led to a significant increase
in PDF1.2 expression. This indicates that the JA signaling path-
way is activated in syp121 syp122, but suppressed by the antag-
onistic effect of high SA levels. Since optimal PDF1.2 expression
also requires ETsignaling (Penninckx et al., 1998), this pathway
is likely to be activated in the syntaxin double mutants as well.
The lack of expression of the JA signaling markers PDF1.2,
THI2.1 (Bohlmann et al., 1998), and VSP2 (Feys et al., 1994)
in the present transcriptomics analysis is consistent with the
antagonism between SA and JA signaling in the syp121
Table 1. Many of the 365 Genes, Up-Regulated Two-Fold or Moreas a Result of Mutation of SYP121 and SYP122, Are Also Up-Regulated in Response to Other Stresses.
Categorya Mean of log2b ‘Overlap’c Percent of 365
Ozone 2.3 328 89.9
Cyclohexamide 1.9 239 65.5
Botrytis cinerea 1.7 241 66.0
Phytophthora infestans 1.46 273 74.8
AgNO3 1.44 257 70.4
Syringolin 1.28 222 60.6
Erysiphe cichoracearum 1.26 285 78.1
NaCl 1.15 217 59.5
Nitrate low 1.07 247 67.7
SA 1.04 232 63.6
a Stress response categories selected by the Meta-Analyzer inGenevestigator (www.genevestigator.ethz.ch; Zimmermann etal., 2004).b Log2 of fold change of the 365 genes in response to theindicated stress. See text for additional information.c Number of the 365 genes that are up-regulated two-fold ormore in response to the indicated stress.
Table 2. Similarity of Selected Expression Profiles to the 365Genes, Up-Regulated Two-Fold or More as a Result of mutation ofSYP121 and SYP122.
Expression profile ‘Overlap’d
Pst AvrRPM1a 223
Pst AvrRPS4a 200
Pstb 188
Chitinb 162
ETb 101
MeJAb 87
Pst hrpAc 59
E. coli c 50
a Bartsch et al. (2006).b Genevestigator (www.genevestigator.ethz.ch).c Thilmony et al. (2006).d Number of the 365 genes that are up-regulated two-fold ormore in response to the indicated stress.
512 | Zhang et al. d syp121 syp122 Unravels Signaling Network
syp122 mutant, as noted previously (Zhang et al., 2007). Two
marker genes for ET signaling–HEL (Potter et al., 1993) and
CHI-B (Norman-Setterblad et al., 2000)–are up-regulated
6.1 and 2.2-fold, respectively. Expression of CHI-B is thought
to depend on both JA and ET signaling, which points to the
complexity of the interplay among the SA, JA, and ETsignaling
pathways in syp121 syp122. No enhanced expression of genes
involved in ET biosynthesis is observed in syp121 syp122, even
though these genes were previously reported to be induced by
ET (van der Straeten et al., 1992; Zhong and Burns, 2003). How-
ever, 101 and 87 of the genes up-regulated after treatment
with ET and MeJA, respectively (www.genevestigator.ethz.ch),
were found among the 365 genes (Table 2; Supplemental Table
1). This observation may suggest that JA and ET signaling are
active, perhaps at a low level, in syp121 syp122, despite high SA
levels.
Screen for Mutations Rescuing syp121 syp122
In order to search for novel factors that contribute to the lesion
formation of syp121 syp122, a forward genetics approach
was taken. Approximately 100 000 mutagenized syp121–1
syp122–1M2 plants were screened for individuals rescued from
the lesion-mimic phenotype. Approximately 240 candidate
mutants were retained. Improved growth and reduced necro-
sis of all the selected mutant lines were confirmed in the M3
generation. We suggest that these 240 lines carry mutant
alleles of genes required for lesion formation. These alleles
we denote suppressors of syntaxin-related death (ssd).
We previously demonstrated that knockout mutations in
EDS5, SID2, and NPR1 only partially suppressed the lesion-
mimic phenotype of the syp121 syp122 double mutant (Zhang
et al., 2007). The triple mutant, syp121–1 syp122–1 sid2-1, had
a characteristic yellow-green color, and complementation
tests with syp121–1 syp122–1 ssd mutants with a similar phe-
notype led to the identification of 15 new sid2 mutants. Also,
syp121–1 syp122–1 npr1-1 had a distinct bleaching phenotype
(see below), but none of the novel suppressor mutants resem-
bled this triple mutant in appearance. Furthermore, crossing
syp121–1 syp122–1 npr1-1 to 70 randomly selected suppressor
mutants did not reveal any npr1 mutants among the ssd
mutants. Unlike the triple mutants with sid2 and npr1,
syp121–1 syp122–1 eds5-3 mutants did not have an immedi-
ately recognizable phenotype. Crosses of syp121–1 syp122–1
eds5-3 to 16 random suppressor mutants revealed two novel
eds5 mutations. We subsequently performed inter-mutant
crosses among a subset of approximately 100 of the suppressor
mutants to place them in complementation groups. Three
groups were established consisting of ten, seven and seven
alleles, respectively. These were named ssd1-1 to ssd1-10,
ssd2-1 to ssd2-7 and ssd3-1 to ssd3-7. Representative triple
mutants of these three complementation groups are shown
in Figure 1A and in Supplemental Figure 1. The mutant alleles
of these three SSDgenes are stronger suppressors of the lesion-
mimic phenotype of syp121–1 syp122–1 than sid2-1, eds5-3,
and npr1-1 (Figure 1A; Zhang et al., 2007).
FMO1, ALD1, and PAD4 Contribute to the Lesion-Mimic
Phenotype of syp121 syp122
Initial mapping placed SSD1 on the top of chromosome 1 be-
tween markers F21M12 and ciw12. Subsequent fine-mapping,
Figure 1. SSD1 Encodes FMO1, SSD2 Encodes ALD1 and SSD3 En-codes PAD4, which All Contribute to Development of the Lesion-Mimic Phenotype of syp121 syp122.
(A) Comparison of the syp121–1 syp122–1 phenotype after SSD1,SSD2, and SSD3 knockout and after knockout of the SA-pathway.Plants grown for 6 weeks.(B) ssd1 alleles are non-functional mutations of FMO1.(C) ssd2 alleles are non-functional mutations of ALD1.(D) ssd3 alleles are non-functional mutations of PAD4.Asterisks indicate stop codons. (See more details in SupplementalFigures 1, 2, 3, and 4.)
Zhang et al. d syp121 syp122 Unravels Signaling Network | 513
using an additional 520 F2 plants, localized SSD1 to an interval
of seven genes (At1g19230 to At1g19310). One gene in this in-
terval, At1g19250, was highly up-regulated in the syp121
syp122 double mutant (22-fold; Supplemental Table 1).
At1g19250 encodes the FLAVIN-DEPENDENT MONO-OXYGEN-
ASE1 (FMO1) that recently has been implicated in defense
(Mishina and Zeier, 2006; Koch et al., 2006; Bartsch et al.,
2006; Olszak et al., 2006). We PCR amplified and sequenced
the coding region of FMO1 from the genomic DNA of the
ten ssd1 suppressor mutants. In each of them, either a prema-
ture stop codon, a base-change resulting in an amino acid sub-
stitution or a splice site mutation was identified (Figure 1B;
Supplemental Figure 2). It is discussed whether the first 45
nucleotides of exon 4 belong to the adjacent intron. Support-
ing Bartsch et al. (2006), the mutation in fmo1-10 is five base
pairs away from the potential splice site at base pair 1548
in exon 4 (Supplemental Figure 2). This is too far away to
affect splicing. This documents that the mutation in fmo1-
10 must be a premature stop-codon in exon 4 and therefore
the longer splice-version contributes to the lesion formation
and dwarfing of syp121 syp122. Subsequently, the T-DNA inser-
tion mutant allele fmo1-1 (Bartsch et al., 2006) in line
SALK_026163 was introduced into syp121–1 syp122–1. The
phenotype of the resulting triple mutant was indistinguish-
able from that of syp121 syp122 ssd1 mutants (data not
shown).
SSD2 was initially mapped to the top of chromosome 2 be-
tween markers nga1145 and ciw3 and then fine-mapped in
a population of 230 F2 plants to a 25-gene interval from
At2g13590 to At2g13850. One of these 25 genes
(At2g13810) was up-regulated in the syp121 syp122 mutant
(11-fold; Supplemental Table 1). At2g13810 encodes the
AGD2-LIKE DEFENSE RESPONSE PROTEIN1 (ALD1), which has
been shown to contribute to defense (Song et al., 2004a,
2004b). The coding region of ALD1 was PCR amplified and se-
quenced using genomic DNA from the seven syp121 syp122
ssd2 triple mutants. In all of them, alterations resulting in mo-
dification of the ALD1 protein were encountered (Figure 1C;
Supplemental Figure 3). Subsequently, the T-DNA insertion
mutant allele ald1-T2 (Song et al., 2004a) in line SALK_007673
was introduced into syp121–1 syp122–1. The phenotype of the
resulting triple mutant was indistinguishable from that of
syp121 syp122 ssd2 mutants (data not shown). An alignment
of the Arabidopsis ALD1 amino acid sequence to the most si-
milar protein for which a 3-D structure is available (i.e. aromatic
aminotransferase from Pyrococcus horikoshii Ot3 gi|14278622)
revealedthat the five amino acid substitutions found in the ssd2
mutant proteins occur in structurally important and well-
conservedaminoacids.Meanwhile, ssd2-3has aprematurestop
codon, and ssd2-4 a splice site mutation.
A map-position was not found for SSD3 on chromosomes 1,
2, 4, or 5, suggesting that it is located on chromosome 3, and
thus could not be mapped using the initial Ler syp121 syp122
line we created. To determine whether SSD3 was located on
chromosome 3 near either SYP121 or SYP122, crosses were
made between syp121–1 syp122–1 ssd3-7 and syp121–1 and
between syp121–1 syp122–1 ssd3-7 and syp122–1. While
21.8% of the F2’s from the cross to syp122–1 had the syp121
syp122 lesion-mimic phenotype (not significantly different
from a 3/16 segregation ratio), no plants with this phenotype
were recorded in the cross to syp121–1, demonstrating ssd3 is
closely linked to syp122. Subsequently, approximately 10 000
F2’s of a cross between syp121–1 syp122–1 ssd3-7 and Col-0
wild-type were analyzed. Only two F2 plants had the
syp121 syp122 phenotype. This indicated exceptionally close
linkage between SYP122 and SSD3. Near SYP122, only one
gene (At3g52430) is up-regulated in syp121 syp122 (10-fold;
Supplemental Table 1). At3g52430, which is three genes distal
from SYP122 (At3g52400), encodes PHYTOALEXIN DEFICIENT 4
(PAD4). Based on PAD4’s close functional association with EDS1
(Wiermer et al., 2005) and the ability of an eds1 mutation to
partially suppress the lesion-mimic phenotype of syp121
syp122 (Zhang et al., 2007; Figure 1A), this result was not un-
expected. We sequenced the coding region of PAD4 from ge-
nomic DNA of the seven syp121 syp122 ssd3 triple mutants.
In six of them, base changes resulting in premature stop codons
and, in one of them, a base change resulting in an amino
acid substitution were encountered (Figure 1D; Supplemental
Figure 4).
We conclude that FMO1, ALD1, and PAD4 are constitutively
active in syp121 syp122 syntaxin double mutants and that
these signaling components, and their downstream elements,
contribute to lesion formation and dwarfing. In Figure 1, the
ssd allele names are converted to fmo1, ald1, and pad4 allele
names.
SID2 and EDS5 Each Confer Activities in Addition to
SA Signaling
Numerous signaling genes are essential as positive regulators
for pathogen defense in Arabidopsis. Some of these are listed
in Supplemental Table 2. To assay which of these genes are in-
volved in development of lesions and dwarfism, mutant alleles
were crossed into syp121 syp122 (Table 3; Supplemental Figure
5). Most of these defense regulators clearly influence the de-
velopment of the lesion-mimic phenotype of syp121 syp122.
Thus, by combining the different mutations in the syntaxin
double mutant background, it is possible to study whether
the defense pathways, defined by these, genes interact.
Both SID2 and EDS5 affect SA accumulation and null
mutants contain very low SA levels after pathogen attack
(Heck et al., 2003). EDS5 encodes a MATE-type transporter re-
quired for SA signaling (Nawrath et al., 2002), and SID2 enco-
des an isochorismate synthase (Wildermuth et al., 2001).
Inactivation of either SID2 or EDS5 rescued the syp121
syp122 lesion-mimic phenotype to approximately the same
level and eliminated the constitutive SA level (Figure 2A)
and PR-1 gene expression (Zhang et al., 2007). However, the
two different triple mutant lines were easily differentiated vi-
sually. syp121–1 syp122–1 eds5-3 was relatively more necrotic
than syp121–1 syp122–1 sid2-1, which was light green with
514 | Zhang et al. d syp121 syp122 Unravels Signaling Network
Table 3. Visual Quantification of Phenotypes of syp121 syp122 Rescued by Mutation in One, Two, or Three Positive Defense RegulatoryGenes.
Size/healtha
SA- HR-like Colonies of Comments3 weeks 6 weeks Response resp. to Gc Gc
Col-0 ++++++ ++++++ – – +++++
Ler ++++++ ++++++ – – +++++
syp121–1 ++++++ ++++++ – – +++++
syp122–1 ++++++ ++++++ – – +++++
syp121–1 syp122–1 ++ + +++++ ++++++ No
eds1-2 ++++++ ++++++ – – ++++++
eds5-3 ++++++ ++++++ – – ++++++
sid2-1 ++++++ ++++++ – – ++++++
NahG ++++++ ++++++ – – ++++++
npr1-1 ++++++ ++++++ – – ++++++
jar1-1 ++++++ ++++++ – – ++++++
ein2-1 ++++++ ++++++ – – +++++
ndr1-1 ++++++ ++++++ – – ++++++
sgt1b-1 ++++++ ++++++ – – ++++
rar1-10 ++++++ ++++++ – – ++
atg7 ++++++ ++++++ – – +++++
fmo1-1 ++++++ ++++++ – – ++++++
npr1-1 ndr1-1 ++++++ ++++++ – – ++++++
rbohD ++++++ ++++++ – – +++++
syp121-NahG ++++++ ++++++ – – +++++
syp121–1 syp122–1 eds1-2 ++++++ ++++½ +++++ +++ +
syp121–1 syp122–1 eds5-3 +++++ +++ +++++ +++ No
syp121–1 syp122–1 sid2-1 +++++ +++ +++++ +++ No
syp121–1 syp122–1 NahG ++++++ ++++½ +++++ ++++ No
syp121–1 syp122–1 npr1-1 +++++ +++ – +++ No Bleaching
syp121–1 syp122–1 jar1-1 ++ + ++++++ ++++++ No
syp121–1 syp122–1 ein2-1 + ½ ++++++ ++++++ No
syp121–1 syp122–1 rbohD ++ + ++++++ ++++++ No
syp121–1 syp122–1 atg7 ++ + ++++++ ++++++ No
syp121–1 syp122–1 rar1-10 +++++ ++ ++++ ++++ No
syp121–1 syp122–1 sgt1b-1 +++++ +½ ++++ ++++ No
syp121–1 syp122–1 ndr1-1 +++++ +½ ++++++ ++++ No
syp121–1 syp122–1 fmo1-nb ++++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ No
syp121–1 syp122–1 pad4-nb ++++++ ++++ ++ ++ ++
syp121–1 syp122–1 ald1-nb ++++++ ++++ ++ +++ No
syp121–1 syp122–1 eds5-3 sid2-1 ++++++ ++++½ ++++++ +++ No
syp121–1 syp122–1 eds5-3 npr1-1 ++++++ ++++½ – ++ No No bleach
syp121–1 syp122–1 npr1-1 sid2-1 ++++++ ++++½ – ++ No No bleach
syp121–1 syp122–1 npr1-1 ndr1-1 ++++++ ++++½ – ++ No Bleaching
syp121–1 syp122–1 npr1-1 ein2-1 ++++++ ++ (dead) – ++ No Bleaching
syp121–1 syp122–1 sid2-1 ein2-1 ++++++ +++ ++++++ ++ No
syp121–1 syp122–1 npr1-1 jar1-1 ++++++ ++ – +++ No Bleaching
syp121–1 syp122–1 npr1-1 atg7 ++++++ +++ – +++ No Bleaching
syp121–1 syp122–1 sid2-1 atg7 ++++++ +++ ++++++ ++++ No
syp121–1 syp122–1 sid2-1 jar1-1 ++++++ +++ +++++ ++++ No
syp121–1 syp122–1 sid2-1 npr1-1 jar1-1 ++++++ +++++ – +++ No No bleach
syp121–1 syp122–1 sid2-1 eds5-3 jar1-1 ++++++ +++++ +++++ ++++ No
syp121–1 syp122–1 sid2-1 npr1-1 ndr1-1 ++++++ +++++½ – ++ No No bleach
Zhang et al. d syp121 syp122 Unravels Signaling Network | 515
distinct necrotic lesions surrounded by chloroses. Interestingly,
the quadruple mutant, syp121–1 syp122–1 eds5-3 sid2-1, per-
formed markedly better than either of the two triple mutants
(Figures 1A and 2B; Table 3; Supplemental Figure 5). These
observations suggest that EDS5 and SID2 have additional,
unique roles, aside from SA biosynthesis, and that all these dis-
tinct roles contribute additively to lesion development and
dwarfism in syp121 syp122.
SA-Dependent, NPR1-Independent Signaling
The triple mutants syp121–1 syp122–1 eds5-3 and syp121–1
syp122–1 sid2-1 contained very little or no SA. In contrast,
syp121–1 syp122–1 npr1-1 plants contained SA amounts ex-
ceeding those of syp121 syp122 (Figure 2A). The high SA levels
are apparently caused by the loss of the two syntaxins, which
leads to continuous SA production. In the absence of func-
tional NPR1, SA perception may be compromised and there-
fore the effects of high SA levels are diminished. However,
the triple mutant syp121–1 syp122–1 npr1-1 did develop char-
acteristic bleaching of leaf and stem tissues, which remained
alive for some additional time. To test the possibility that
the bleaching is a phenomenon restricted to the npr1-1 allele,
theNPR1mutant alleles npr1-2, npr1-3 (Cao et al., 1997),npr1-5
(Shah et al., 1997), and npr1-P4-7 (Xiao et al., 2005) were
crossed into syp121–1 syp122–1. The resulting triple mutant
lines all show the same bleaching phenotype (data not shown).
Interestingly, we also observed bleaching when npr1 single
mutants were sprayed with SA (data not shown). The bleach-
ing phenotype thus appears to be associated with high SA lev-
els. Introducing mutant alleles of SID2 and EDS5 into syp121
syp122 npr1, thereby abolishing SA biosynthesis, generated
quadruple mutants with improved performance (Figure 2B;
Table 3; Supplemental Figure 5). Importantly, these syp121
syp122 npr1 eds5 and syp121 syp122 npr1 sid2 quadruple
mutants do not have the bleaching phenotype of syp121
syp122 npr1. These observations suggest SA-dependent,
NPR1-independent processes in Arabidopsis.
ALD1 and FMO1-Mediated Signals, SA and NPR1
In order to determine how defense pathways controlled by
ALD1 and FMO1 interact with SA signaling, a number of com-
binations were made between alleles of these genes and of
EDS5, SID2, NPR1, and PAD4, all in the syp121 syp122 mutant
background. The partially rescued syp121 syp122 fmo1 and
syp121–1 syp122–1 ald1 performed even better when SA bio-
synthesis or signaling also was inactivated (i.e. in the quadru-
ple mutants including mutations in EDS5, SID2, or PAD4) (Table
3). These observations were made in F2 populations segregat-
ing for mutant alleles of the following six gene-pairs: FMO1/
ESD5, FMO1/SID2, FMO1/PAD4, ALD1/SID2, ALD1/ESD5, and
Table 3. (Continued)
Size/healtha
SA- HR-like Colonies of Comments3 weeks 6 weeks Response resp. to Gc Gc
syp121–1 syp122–1 pad4-19 eds5-3 ++++++ +++++c ++ + ++++
syp121–1 syp122–1 pad4-19 npr1-1 ++++++ +++++d – + ++++ No bleach
syp121–1 syp122–1 pad4-19 sid2-1 ++++++ ++++++e ++ + ++++
syp121–1 syp122–1 pad4-19 fmo1-10 +++++f
syp121–1 syp122–1 pad4-n ald1-n +++++g
syp121–1 syp122–1 sid2-1 fmo1-n ++++++h
syp121–1 syp122–1 sid2-1 ald1-n +++++i
syp121–1 syp122–1 npr1-1 fmo1-n ++++ j
syp121–1 syp122–1 npr1-1 ald1-n ++++k
syp121–1 syp122–1 eds5-3 fmo1-n ++++++l
syp121–1 syp122–1 eds5-3 ald1-5 +++++m
a Higher number of plusses denotes larger and more healthy plants. ‘½’ denotes half a plus.b n: more than one mutant allele tested.c Result confirmed in an F2 population segregating for eds5-3 and pad4-14.d Result confirmed in F2 populations segregating for npr1-1 and four pad4 alleles.e Result confirmed in F2 populations segregating for sid2-1 and five pad4 alleles.f Result confirmed in F2 populations segregating for combinations of four pad4 and nine fmo1 alleles.g Result obtained in F2 populations segregating for combinations of three pad4 and five ald1 alleles.h Result obtained in F2 populations segregating for combinations of sid2-1 and a novel sid2 allele, and eight fmo1 alleles.i Result obtained in F2 populations segregating for sid2-1 and four ald1 alleles.j Result obtained in F2 populations segregating for npr1-1 and three fmo1 alleles.k Result obtained in F2 populations segregating for npr1-1 and three ald1 alleles.l Result obtained in F2 populations segregating for eds5-3 and three fmo1 alleles.m Result confirmed in segregating F2 population.
516 | Zhang et al. d syp121 syp122 Unravels Signaling Network
ALD1/PAD4. Approximately 1/16 of the plants became remark-
ably larger, as exemplified in Figure 3, suggesting that ALD1
and FMO1 mediate signals that are distantly associated to
SA signaling. However, it is interesting that no notably larger
plants were found in F2 populations of crosses between syp121
syp122npr1 and syp121 syp122 fmo1or between syp121 syp122
npr1 and syp121 syp122 ald1, as exemplified in Figure 3. All
these phenotypes have been recorded using several alleles,
as indicated in Table 3. This suggests that FMO1 and ALD1
contribute to the lesion-mimic phenotype of syp121 syp122
by mechanisms that are partially parallel to SA signaling and
to PAD4-dependent signaling. Interestingly, the ALD1 and
FMO1 signals also appear to act separately from the SA-
independent signals suggested above to be conferred by
EDS5 and SID2. However, ALD1 and FMO1 seem to mediate
signals that depend on NPR1. All in all, these observations
suggest the existence of SA-independent, NPR1-dependent
signaling.
R-Gene-Mediated Signaling Pathways in syp121 syp122
In general, R-gene-dependent resistance mediated by toll-
interleukin-1receptor(TIR)-typenucleotidebinding-leucine-rich
repeat (NB-LRR) proteins depends on EDS1 and PAD4, whereas
resistance mediated by coiled-coil (CC)-type NB-LRR proteins is
NDR1-dependent (Hammond-Kosack and Parker, 2003; Wiermer
et al., 2005). The proteins RAR1 and SGT1b are important for
Figure 2. Quadruple Mutants Demonstrate SA-Independent Sig-naling Activities of SID2 and EDS5.
(A) SA content in shoots of 4-week-old plants (mean 6 SD, n = 3).(B) Plants grown for 6 weeks. (Subset of genotypes from Supple-mental Figure 5.)
Figure 3. syp121 syp122Has ALD1 and FMO1-Mediated Signals thatAre Separate from SA-Mediated Signals, but Requires NPR1.
In segregating F2 populations of approximately 100 individuals inthe syp121–1 syp122–1 genetic background, approximately 1/16 ofthe plants are performing notably better only in the sid2-13fmo1-10 and sid2-13ald1-6 crosses. Plants grown for 6 weeks. (Theseobservations are confirmed using several allele combinations, seeTable 3.)
Zhang et al. d syp121 syp122 Unravels Signaling Network | 517
the stability of the NB-LRR proteins and are thus required for
R-gene-mediated resistance in general (Holt et al., 2005).
Given the contribution of PAD4 and EDS1 to the syp121
syp122 phenotype (Figure 1; Table 3; Supplemental Figure 5;
Zhang et al., 2007), we sought to analyze whether R-gene-
mediated signals were functioning in the syp121 syp122
mutant and contributing to its lesion-mimic phenotype. Since
EDS1 and PAD4 act upstream of the SA pathway (Hammond-
Kosack and Parker, 2003; Wiermer et al., 2005), which clearly
contributes to the syp121 syp122 lesion-mimic phenotype, the
question remains whether the SA pathway activation in syp121
syp122 is the only signal dependent on EDS1/PAD4 function.
Improved performance of the syntaxin double mutant in an
eds1 or pad4 background compared to a sid2, eds5, or npr1
background indicates that these latter three SA signaling com-
ponents control only a subset of the pathways triggered by
EDS1 and PAD4 (Figure 1). Remarkably, inactivation of SID2,
EDS5, or NPR1 in the syp121–1 syp122–1 pad4-19 genetic back-
ground led to further improved performance of the resulting
quadruple mutant relative to the triple mutant (Figure 4A;
Table 3; Supplemental Figure 5). This result suggests either that
the SA signaling is independent of PAD4 or, more likely, that
SID2, EDS5, and NPR1 also control SA- and PAD4-independent
signals.
Further support for a role of R-gene-mediated signaling in
the lesion-mimic phenotype of syp121 syp122 was provided by
the partial suppression of this mutant phenotype by mutations
in NDR1, RAR1, or SGT1b (Figure 4B; Table 3). These mutations
rescued to approximately the same degree as mutations in SA
signaling genes until the plants reached the 3-week stage. In
older plants, mutations of NDR1, RAR1, or SGT1b resulted in
only slightly enhanced performance compared to syp121
syp122 (Figure 4C; Table 3; Supplemental Figure 5). To analyze
whether NDR1-mediated signaling interacts with the SA path-
way, we introduced the ndr1-1 allele into syp121–1 syp122–1
npr1-1 and syp121–1 syp122–1 sid2-1. The resulting quadruple
mutants performed significantly better than either of the tri-
ple mutants, suggesting that NDR1 activates SA-independent
defense processes (Figure 4C; Table 3). Interestingly, the SA-
related bleaching in syp121–1 syp122–1 npr1-1was maintained
in syp121–1 syp122–1 npr1-1 ndr1-1 in contrast to syp121–1
syp122–1 npr1-1 sid2-1, where no bleaching is observed. This
indicates that NDR1-mediated signaling does not influence SA
accumulation. Finally, the quintuple mutant syp121–1 syp122–1
npr1-1 sid2-1 ndr1-1 was obtained. Even though older plants of
this genotype became necrotic, the quintuple mutant grew
almost as well as wild-type Col-0.
In conclusion, these results suggest that loss of SYP121 and
SYP122 leads to the activation of similar signaling pathways as
CC-NB-LRR and TIR-NB-LRR-type R-gene-mediated pathogen
recognition. This observation is corroborated by the similari-
ties between transcript profiles of syp121 syp122 and plants
in which R-gene signaling was triggered (Table 2; Supplemen-
tal Table 1).
Figure 4. R-Gene-Mediated Type of Signals Are Active in the Syn-taxin Double Mutant.
(A) syp121 syp122 has PAD4-mediated signals that are separatefrom EDS5, SID2, and NPR1-mediated signals (6-week-old plants).(B) syp121 syp122 has NDR1, SGT1b, and RAR1-mediated signals(3-week-old plants).(C) NDR1 signal is independent of SA (6-week-old plants).A and C are subsets of genotypes from Supplemental Figure 5.
518 | Zhang et al. d syp121 syp122 Unravels Signaling Network
The autophagy component of PCD has been implicated in
R-gene-mediated resistance (Lui et al., 2005). A number of
autophagy genes (ATGs) have been identified in a variety of
organisms. In Arabidopsis, ATG7 is a non-redundant gene
(Doelling et al., 2002) and the T-DNA atg7 allele in
SALK_057605 can be used to test the role of autophagy in
the lesion-mimic phenotype of syp121 syp122. Blocking
autophagy by this method did not cause any visible phenotypic
effects (Table 3; Supplemental Figure 5). This result suggests
that autophagy does not play a role in the lesion-mimic phe-
notype, the HR-like response to the powdery mildew fungi or
the SA-hypersensitivity (see below) phenotypes of the syntaxin
double mutant. We also examined the quadruple mutants
syp121–1 syp122–1 npr1-1 atg7 and syp121–1 syp122–1 sid2-1
atg7, and were again unable to demonstrate any effect of
the atg7 mutation. These observations are supported by intro-
ductions of mutant alleles of the non-redundant genes ATG3
(SALK_031693) and ATG6 (SALK_051168; Fujiki et al., 2007) in-
to syp121–1 syp122–1. In both cases, all plants in syntaxin dou-
ble mutant homozygous families that were segregating for
the atg3 or atg6 mutations exhibited the typical syp121–1
syp122–1 phenotype (data not shown).
An oxidative burst, generated by NADPH oxidases, is an in-
dispensable element of pathogen defense mechanisms in
plants (Foyer and Noctor, 2005). In Arabidopsis, AtrbohD is
the NADPH oxidase primarily responsible for this burst (Torres
et al., 2002). We introduced the T-DNA atrbohD allele in
SALK_070610 into the syp121 syp122 background. This muta-
tion seemed to have no effect on the lesion-mimic phenotype,
the HR-like response to the powdery mildew fungi or the SA-
hypersensitivity (see below) of the syntaxin double mutant
(Table 3; Supplemental Figure 5). However, both the atrbohD
and syp121–1 syp122–1 atrhohD plants were hyper-sensitive to
high light, which confirms the presence of the atrbohD
mutant allele (data not shown).
Ethylene Signaling Antagonizes syp121 syp122 Lesion
Formation
We previously suggested that the ET and JA signaling path-
ways are activated in syp121 syp122 (Zhang et al., 2007). This
was documented by the increased expression of the PDF1.2
transcript, a marker for these two pathways (Penninckx et
al., 1998), following interruption of the SA signaling pathway
in the syp121 syp122 double mutant. To analyze the role of the
ET signaling pathway in the double syntaxin mutant pheno-
types, the mutant allele ein2-1 was crossed into syp121–1
syp122–1. The biochemical function of EIN2 is not known,
but the protein is required for general ETsignaling (Benavente
and Alonso, 2006). EIN2 appeared to suppress necrosis in the
syp121–1 syp122–1 double mutant, as suggested by the en-
hanced necrotic phenotype of syp121–1 syp122–1 ein2-1 triple
mutant (Figure 5; Table 3; Supplemental Figure 5). This ein2-1
effect was even more obvious when NPR1 was also mutated,
but not when SID2 was mutated (Table 3; Figure 5). The
quadruple mutant syp121–1 syp122–1 npr1-1 ein2-1 died after
approximately 6 weeks.
JA Signaling Impacts Lesion Formation in syp121 syp122
Plants
The jar1-1 mutant allele was used to assess the importance of
JA signaling for the syp121 syp122 phenotypes. JAR1 catalyses
conjugation of JA to amino acids (Staswick and Tiryaki, 2004).
When introduced into syp121–1 syp122–1, no phenotypic con-
sequences were observed (Figure 5; Table 3; Supplemental Fig-
ure 5). This lack of effect was confirmed by using a coi1 mutant
(Xie et al., 1998) and a mutant (SALK_017756) in the AOS gene
(Park et al., 2002). None of the plants in an F2 population of
syp121–1 syp122–1, segregating for the coi1-1 or the aos allele,
deviated from the necrotic and dwarfed appearance of the
syntaxin double mutant. During the flowering of these plants,
expected pollen-sterile individuals were detected, confirming
that these lines were homozygous for coi1-1 or aos (data not
shown).
The absence of a detectable role for JA signaling could be
due to the JA pathway being suppressed by the high SA level
found in the syntaxin double mutant (Spoel et al., 2003; Zhang
et al., 2007). To test this hypothesis, mutant combinations
blocking both SA and JA signaling or biosynthesis were crossed
into the syp121 syp122 background. However, this approach
gave what appear to be conflicting results (Figure 5; Table 3;
Figure 5. Ethylene Signal Has Anti-Necrotic Effect on syp121syp122.
Phenotypes of syp121–1 syp122–1 after introduction of ethyleneand jasmonic acid signaling mutations (6-week-old plants). (Subsetof genotypes from Supplemental Figure 5.)
Zhang et al. d syp121 syp122 Unravels Signaling Network | 519
Supplemental Figure 5). syp121–1 syp122–1 npr1-1 jar1-1
showed more necrosis than syp121–1 syp122–1 npr1-1 plants,
which is consistent with the suggestion by Rao et al. (2000) that
JA signaling protects against cell death. However, syp121–1
syp122–1 sid2-1 jar1-1 plants were indistinguishable from
syp121–1 syp122–1 sid2-1 plants. Surprisingly, the jar1-1 muta-
tion resulted in improved performance of the quintuple
mutants syp121–1 syp122–1 sid2-1 npr1-1 jar1-1 and syp121–1
syp122–1 sid2-1 eds5-3 jar1-1.
Gc-Induced HR-Like PCD
syp121 syp122 has a multi-cellular HR-like response to the two
powdery mildew fungi Bgh and Gc. Introducing mutant alleles
of gene in the SA pathway into the syntaxin double mutant
demonstrated this HR-like response to be SA-independent
(Zhang et al., 2007). The HR-like response confers complete re-
sistance to Gc. Combining any two of the three SA pathway
mutations, eds5-3, sid2-1, and npr1-1, in the syntaxin double
mutant did not break this PCD-associated resistance (Figure 6).
In order to determine which defense components contrib-
ute to this powdery mildew-induced HR-like response, a series
of triple mutants were examined macroscopically. Neither the
HR-like response nor the resistance to Gc was significantly af-
fected by inactivating the NDR1, RAR1, or SGT1b genes impli-
cated in R-gene signaling (Table 3). However, mutations in
EDS1, and, to a greater extent, in PAD4, partially restricted
the HR-like response and disease resistance. This allowed weak
colony growth occasionally to be observed on these triple
mutants (Table 3). Interestingly, introducing each of the three
SA pathway mutations, eds5-3, sid2-1, and npr1-1, into
syp121–1 syp122–1 pad4-19 had an obvious negative effect
on the HR-like response, and the quadruple mutants were sus-
ceptible to Gc during the first week after inoculation (Table 3;
Figure 6). However, at later time-points, necrosis was observed,
which arrested fungal growth (data not shown). We have no
evidence to suggest that the following genes are required for
the HR-like response and resistance to Gc resistance of the
syp121 syp122 double mutant: JAR1, EIN2, RbohD, ATG7,
FMO1, and ALD1. Furthermore, when mutations of some of
these genes were introduced into triple mutants blocked in
SA synthesis or signaling (syp121–1 syp122–1 npr1-1, syp121–1
syp122–1 eds5-3, and syp121–1 syp122–1 sid2-1), the HR-like
response was not sufficiently suppressed to permit Gc
growth (Table 3).
syp121 syp122 Mutants are Hypersensitive to SA
Wild-type plants respond to exogenous SA by induction of, for
instance, the PR-1 gene (Durrant and Dong, 2004). However,
even though SA is involved in responses leading to PCD,
wild-type plants do not necessarily develop PCD, even when
treated with high concentrations of SA. This suggests activation
of parallel signaling is required for PCD, and, as such, SA is
considered a potentiator rather than a trigger for PCD in
R-gene-mediated HR (Shirasu et al., 1997; Tenhaken and Rubel
1997).
In contrast to wild-type plants, very young syp121 syp122
mutants underwent PCD in response to exogenous SA (Fig-
ure 7). This suggests that the syntaxin double mutant is hyper-
sensitive to SA. To examine whether this SA-hypersensitivity
was due in part to the high endogenous SA level in the syn-
taxin double mutant (Figure 2A; Zhang et al., 2007), mutations
of the SID2 or EDS5 genes or the NahG gene were introduced
into the syp121–1 syp122–1 background. The SA-hypersensitiv-
ity of the syntaxin double mutant was still observed in mutants
unable to synthesize SA. However, the SA-hypersensitivity did
require an intact NPR1 protein (Figure 7). The independence of
endogenous SA and the uniqueness of this phenotype in
syp121–1 syp122–1 were supported by an analysis of other
dwarfed and/or necrotic mutants constitutively expressing
the SA signaling pathway. None of the tested lines, acd2-2,
acd11-1, cpr1-1, lsd1-1, or mpk4, all of which can be rescued
by interruption of the SA signaling pathway, exhibits such
an SA-hypersensitivity (Figure 7; Table 3).
Having shown that a number of signaling pathways, other
than the SA pathway, are active in syp121 syp122, we analyzed
whether these other defense pathways contributed to the
Figure 6. Simultaneous Mutations in PAD4 and SA-Signaling GenesDelay Powdery Mildew-Induced Multicellular HR-like Response insyp121 syp122.
Development of Gc colonies 6 d after inoculation. syp121–1syp122–1 is left out, since its severe necrosis does not allow anyGc-induced phenotype to be observed. See also Zhang et al.(2007). (Plants 3 weeks old at time of inoculation.)
520 | Zhang et al. d syp121 syp122 Unravels Signaling Network
SA-hypersensitive phenotype. Among the pathways tested,
none could be assigned to this phenotype. Furthermore, path-
ways that did not contribute to the lesion phenotype in syp121
syp122 were also not involved in the SA-hypersensitivity
(Table 3).
DISCUSSION
Activation of the different inducible defense mechanisms
against microbial pathogens can be recognized by transcrip-
tomics. Here, such analysis showed that inactivation of both
SYP121 and SYP122 led to activation of 365 genes by more
than two-fold prior to the visible appearance of cell death.
Most of these genes are also induced by ozone, by a necrotro-
phic fungus and by a cell death-inducing oomycete. Therefore,
the signals required for PCD are already present before the ap-
pearance of necroses. A strong overlap with genes induced by
HR-inducing avirulent bacteria points to the operation of R-
gene-mediated defense pathways in syp121 syp122. Previous
evidence for a role of SA signaling in the phenotype develop-
ment of this line is corroborated by the observation that more
than half of the 365 genes in syp121 syp122 also respond to SA.
However, it was surprising to discover that a large majority of
these genes, otherwise related to induction of cell death, are
also induced by a virulent isolate of the powdery mildew fun-
gus Gc, which does not elicit host cell death. A possible expla-
nation is that this fungal pathogen primes but does not fully
activate PCD, or that Gc releases efficient anti-cell death effec-
tors to the plant cell. A significant number of the 365 genes are
PAMP-induced, suggesting that inactivation of SYP121 and
SYP122 also activates PAMP-type signaling. Interestingly, only
one gene is down-regulated after mutating the syntaxin genes.
This is in contrast to the transcript analysis of the acd11 lesion-
mimic mutant, where a large set of genes involved in primary
metabolism is down-regulated (Brodersen et al., 2002). Inocula-
tions with pathogens also cause a reduction in transcript levels
of genes involved in primary metabolism, even before disease
development (e.g. Zimmerli et al., 2004; Thilmony et al., 2006;
Truman et al., 2006; Gjetting et al., 2007). This indicates that
SYP121 and SYP122 function as regulators of a signaling node
that controls defense pathways, without affecting primary me-
tabolism. The log2 of the change of the 365 genes in all 83 Gen-
evestigator categories was found to be 0.26, showing that this
set of genes are not common response genes of the many dif-
ferent kinds of stresses in this collection. This demonstrates that
the syp121 and syp122 mutations specifically elicit defense-like
gene expression changes.
The role of the JA and ET signaling pathways in the syntaxin
double mutant syp121 syp122 is less clear. A few marker genes
indicative of constitutive ET signaling are up-regulated; how-
ever, ET biosynthesis genes are not up-regulated in syp121
syp122. Yet, mutating EIN2 in syp121 syp122 suggested that
ET signaling plays a role in delaying lesion formation. ET seems
to have conflicting regulatory functions in pathogen defense
(van Loon et al., 2006). ET can apparently both promote and
inhibit PCD. It is thought to potentiate senescence-related
PCD (Oh et al., 1997), ozone-induced PCD (Overmyer et al.,
2000), and vad1 mutant PCD (Bouchez et al., 2007). On the
other hand, resistance to the necrotrophic fungus, B. cinerea,
requires functional EIN2 and application of ET reduces suscep-
tibility (Thomma et al., 1999), suggesting that ET acts antago-
nistically to PCD. Similar to the latter case, it is likely that
introducing the ein2-1 allele into syp121–1 syp122–1 interrupts
a constitutive ETsignal that otherwise serves to protect against
cell death. Interestingly, the lesion formation, delayed by ET,
appears to depend on a SID2-mediated signal. This is seen from
the fact that the ein2-1 allele does not promote lesion forma-
tion in syp121–1 syp122–1 sid2-1. However, it does not depend
on NPR1, since ein2-1 does promote lesion formation in
syp121–1 syp122–1 npr1-1 (see Figure 5). An NPR1-indepen-
dent, SID2-mediated signal in syp121–1 syp122–1 that poten-
tially can be antagonized by ET is described below.
JA can also have both anti-PCD (Overmyer et al., 2000) and
pro-PCD (Mur et al., 2006) functions. However, while we
did not observe an effect of interrupting JA signaling
in syp121–1 syp122–1, using mutations in three different
genes, there were potentially anti- and pro-PCD effects of
Figure 7. syp121 syp122 is SA-Hypersensitive, Independently of En-dogenous SA.
Necrosis stimulation after SA-treatment of syp121–1 syp122–1 andsyp121–1 syp122–1 rescued by additional mutations, and of otherlesion-mimic mutants (3-week-old plants).
Zhang et al. d syp121 syp122 Unravels Signaling Network | 521
JA signaling, depending on which SA signaling elements were
knocked out (see Figure 5). Further analyses are required in or-
der to explain these observations.
EDS1 is required for development of the syntaxin double
mutant lesion-mimic phenotype (Figure 1; Zhang et al.,
2007). Since EDS1 and PAD4 are closely associated functionally
(Wiermer et al., 2005), PAD4 would also be expected to play
a role. We were originally unable to introduce a mutation
of PAD4 into syp121–1 syp122–1 due to extremely close genetic
linkage. However, this barrier was overcome by isolation of in-
duced mutations in PAD4 after mutagenesis of syp121–1
syp122–1 and selection of genotypes with improved perfor-
mance. This confirmed the requirement of PAD4. In the same
way, mutant alleles of FMO1 and ALD1 were encountered,
demonstrating requirement of these genes for development
of the syp121 syp122 lesion-mimic phenotype. All in all, we es-
timate that PAD4, FMO1, or ALD1 mutant alleles, as well as
SID2 or EDS5 mutant alleles, each constitute 5–10% of the
240 ssd alleles recovered from the suppressor screen.
The finding that EDS1, PAD4, NDR1, RAR1, and SGT1b were
required for the lesion phenotype suggests that R-gene-
mediated types of signals are activated when both SYP121
and SYP122 are mutated. The requirement for all five genes
suggests that both CC-NB-LRR and TIR-NB-LRR types of signals
are active, but the stronger effects of the EDS1 and PAD4 muta-
tions suggest that the TIR-NB-LRR type may dominate. This was
further supported by the HR-like response to Gc being depen-
dent on EDS1 and PAD4, but not on NDR1. We have no direct
evidence to support a direct role for R-proteins in signal acti-
vation in syp121 syp122, but the simplest explanation is that
they are. Activation of NB-LRRs is not dependent on the pres-
ence of pathogens per se. In fact, NB-LRRs can be activated by
amino acid-substitutions, truncations (Zhang et al., 2003;
Howles et al., 2005; Takken et al., 2006; Weaver et al.,
2006), or simply over-expression (Stokes et al., 2002). RAR1
and SGT1b are thought to be required for the stability of
NB-LRRs (Holt et al., 2005), and the need for these genes in
the syp121 syp122 lesion-mimic phenotype development
may support that NB-LRRs themselves are involved. Therefore,
the observation that the R-gene-mediated defenses may be ac-
tivated by the syntaxin double mutant suggests that intact ves-
icle traffic is required for maintaining a stable balance
between active and inactive NB-LRR proteins in the absence
of recognizable effectors.
We found that the many active signaling pathways in
syp121 syp122 make this genotype a highly useful tool for
the study of interactions between the different pathogen de-
fense pathways. For this purpose, we combined two or more
knockout mutations in positive defense regulators in the
syp121 syp122 genetic background. The most common obser-
vation was that this improved the rescue, which, in general,
indicates that these regulators control independent signals
that make separate contributions to the lesion-mimic pheno-
type. Yet, we also encountered improved rescue by combining
presumed closely associated signaling components by what
appears tobereliefofsignalcompoundaccumulation.Anexam-
ple of this is probably what we observe when eds5-3 or sid2-1
improves the rescuing effect of npr1-1. In contrast, when no im-
proved rescue is observed after combining two mutations, this
strongly suggests that these signaling components are closely
associated.
The result of combining knockouts in EDS5 and SID2
strongly indicates that each of these two genes are involved
in mediating signals in addition to SA. Brodersen et al.
(2005) suggested that SID2 is involved in the biosynthesis of
an additional signaling molecule that might also be sensitive
to the hydroxylase activity of NahG. This is consistent with our
finding, in that expression of NahG in syp121–1 syp122–1 im-
proved the performance significantly compared to inactiva-
tion of EDS5 or SID2 (Supplemental Figure 5). Heck et al.
(2003) reach a similar conclusion regarding the effects of NahG
expression.
Abolishing SA in syp121–1 syp122–1 npr1-1 by introducing
mutant alleles of EDS5 or SID2 improved the performance of
the plants. This suggests that SA contributes to the lesion-
mimic phenotype also in the absence of functional NPR1,
and that SA in itself has NPR1-independent effects. We corre-
late this phenomenon to tissue bleaching caused by SA in the
absence of functional NPR1. It remains unclear whether this
effect is caused by SA toxicity or whether a true signaling ef-
fect of SA is involved. A similar SA-induced bleaching in npr1-1
was observed by Bowling et al. (1997) and Cao et al. (1997). SA-
dependent, NPR1-independent signaling has been suggested
several times (Nandi et al., 2003; Yoshioka et al., 2001; Durrant
and Dong, 2004; Desveaux et al., 2004; Uquillas et al., 2004;
Tsutsui et al., 2006; Yaeno et al., 2006; Zhang et al., 2003),
but further investigations are needed in order to establish
the nature of the SA-related bleaching.
The recently discovered signaling element FMO1 is sug-
gested (1) to be involved in TIR-NB-LRR resistance mediated
through EDS1 (Bartsch et al., 2006), (2) to be essential for
SA accumulation in distal but not local leaves during SAR
(Mishina and Zeier, 2006), and (3) to be required for basal de-
fense (Koch et al., 2006). The aminotransferase ALD1 has also
been reported to be required for SAR and SA accumulation in
distal leaves, as well as for resistance in local leaves. However,
mutation in ALD1 only caused a minor reduction in the SA ac-
cumulation in local leaves. The loss of resistance in the ald1-T2
T-DNA mutant line could not be rescued by treatments with
the SA analogue, BTH, suggesting that another mechanism
is involved (Song et al., 2004b). Furthermore, ALD1 is sug-
gested to function separately from PAD4 in terms of pathogen
defense and PCD development in the lesion-mimic mutant
acd6 (Song et al., 2004b).
We find it interesting that mutations in FMO1 and in ALD1
partially rescued the lesion-mimic phenotype of syp121
syp122. Firstly, this confirms once again that the syntaxin
double mutant phenotype is caused by a concurrent activation
of several defense signaling pathways. Secondly, the in-
volvement of FMO1 in TIR-NB-LRR resistance supports that
522 | Zhang et al. d syp121 syp122 Unravels Signaling Network
R-gene-mediated types of signals are activated in the syntaxin
double mutant. Furthermore, it is noteworthy that the qua-
druple mutants, where we mutated FMO1 or ALD1 on one
hand, and PAD4, EDS5, and SID2 on the other hand, all
exhibited improved rescue relative to all five triple mutants.
This suggests that both FMO1 and ALD1 may function in par-
allel to SA signaling. Regarding FMO1, this agrees with the ad-
ditive effects of FMO1 and SID2 mutations on disease
resistance (Bartsch et al., 2006) and failure of FMO1 mutations
to affect local leaf SA level after pathogen attack (Bartsch et
al., 2006; Mishina and Zeier, 2006). Regarding ALD1, it is com-
parable to the situation for the triple mutant pad4 ald1 acd6,
described by Song et al. (2004b), that performs better than
ald1 acd6 and pad4 acd6. In contrast, the fact that combina-
tions of knockouts of FMO1 and NPR1, as well as of ALD1
and NPR1, do not give an improved rescue of the syntaxin dou-
ble mutant may suggest that these two genes mediate signals
that fully depend on NPR1.
A qPCR PR-1 transcript analysis has been conducted on most
of the lines in Table 3 (data not shown). An inverse correlation
between the level of rescue and the PR-1 transcript expression
was found. While the jar1 and ein2 mutations did not reduce
the high PR-1 transcript level in syp121 syp122, rar1, sgt1b, and
ndr1 reduced it 10-fold. Meanwhile, eds5, sid2, npr1, fmo1,
and NahG reduced the level approximately a 1000-fold, thereby
approaching wild-type transcript level. The PR-1 transcript level
in the quadruple mutants, having at least one of the eds5, sid2,
or npr1 mutations, was obviously also reduced to wild-type lev-
els. For that reason, this analysis was not able to provide support
for the phenotype assay of the effect of combining mutations in
two or more positive defense regulators.
Not surprisingly, the syntaxin double mutant is powdery mil-
dew resistant. Unlike the single epidermal cell HR seen in Ara-
bidopsis in response to Bgh, this resistance is manifested as
a multi-cellular death reaction around the attacked epidermal
cell, after the initial haustorium is established (Zhang et al.,
2007). We have not yet encountered a signaling pathway that
alone is required for this resistance. Rather, it appears to be
dependent on the concerted action of a number of signaling
pathways. Mutation of PAD4 reduces the resistance to the
greatest extent. On the other hand, single or double mutations
of EDS5, SID2, and NPR1 do not affect the resistance. However,
when combined with a PAD4 mutation, they reduced resis-
tance further (Figure 6). Deciphering the complete signaling
events that lead to this resistance awaits future analyses. In
the case of the SA-hypersensitivity of the syntaxin double mu-
tant, we have found NPR1 to be strictly required. NPR1 possibly
functions like a downstream ‘receptor’ for SA, and therefore
may not be involved per se in making the plant hypersensitive.
Interestingly, both the powdery mildew resistance and the SA-
hypersensitivity have the potential to be mediated by R-gene-
type of signaling, which would agree well with the notion
above that such signaling appears active in syp121 syp122.
On the basis of well established signaling connections pre-
sented in the literature, we summarize some of our observa-
tions for the signaling network, activated by mutation of
SYP121 and SYP122, in the model shown in Figure 8. We spec-
ulate that the broad activation of defense pathways reflects an
equally broad activation of R-proteins, leaving many
unknowns to be uncovered. Thereby, syp121 syp122 may ex-
press responses that otherwise would require several inocula-
tion experiments to obtain. This underpins the usefulness of
this line for studies of the signaling network. For instance,
we find it intriguing that NPR1 is the only gene of those tested
that appears to be needed for the signaling leading to the SA-
hypersensitivity. This suggests that more active defense signal-
ing pathways can still be found in the syntaxin double mutant.
METHODS
Plants
Arabidopsis thaliana plants were grown at 20�C, 125 lE sm�2
in short day (8 h light) conditions. Genotypes are described in
Supplemental Table 2. The mutant lines jar1-1, coi1-1, ein2-1,
ndr1-1, sgt1b-1, rar1-10, acd2-2, cpr1, as well as T-DNA inser-
tion lines, were provided through NASC (http://arabidopsis.
info). NahG and npr1-1 were provided by Xinnian Dong (Duke
University, NC, USA), eds1-2 by Jane Parker (Max Planck Insti-
tute, Cologne, Germany), eds5-3 and sid2-1 by Jean-Pierre
Metraux (University of Fribourg, Switzerland), mpk4 by John
Mundy (University of Copenhagen), and npr1-N4-7 by Shu-
nyuan Xiao (University of Maryland Biotechnology Institute,
MD, USA). Triple mutants of syp121–1, syp122–1 and various
positive defense signaling mutants were selected in F3 families
derived from F2 plants showing the syp121 syp122-dwarf/
necrosis-phenotype. Homozygous triple mutant F3 plants were
identified either as partially rescued plants or using molecular
markers for the mutation in the positive defense signaling
Figure 8. Hypothetical Model for the Signaling Network, Activatedby the Knockout of SYP121 and SYP122.
Zhang et al. d syp121 syp122 Unravels Signaling Network | 523
gene. Subsequently, the mutations in positive defense signaling
were confirmed using molecular markers. The alleles eds1-2,
rar1-10, and sgt1b-1 are crossed in from Ler, and the rescuing
effects of these are confirmed in four independent F3 descents
for each (data not shown). Quadruple and quintuple mutants
were obtained in the same manner by crossing triple and qua-
druple mutants.
Expression Profiling
Col-0, syp121–1, syp122–1, and syp121–1 pen122–1 were har-
vested in three replicas 2.5 weeks after sowing, prior to the
appearance of lesions on syp121 syp122. Total RNA was
extracted using an RNeasy kit (Qiagen GmbH, Hilden,
Germany) and labeling and hybridization on the ATH1 micro-
arrays (Thibaud-Nissen et al., 2006) (one sample per chip) were
performed according to the manufacturers instructions
(www.affymetrix.com/support/technical/manual/expression_
manual.affx). Raw intensity data was normalized using the R
(R Development Core Team, 2004) Affy package (Gautier et al.,
2004) using the perfect match-only implementation of dCHIP
(Li and Wong, 2001) and qspline (Workman et al., 2002). We
applied one-way ANOVA in order to identify statistical signif-
icant differentially expressed genes. False-positive rates were
estimated by recalculating P-values with permuted sample
categories. This procedure was repeated four times, generat-
ing four sets of 22 810 permuted P-values. From this, the
chosen P-value cut-off was estimated to contain a maximum
of 15 false-positives (i.e. ;2.5%).
Mutagenesis of syp121 syp122
Approximately 30 000 Col-0 syp121–1 syp122–1 seeds were
mutagenized using 0.2% ethyl methane-sulfonate (EMS) at
room temperature for 12 h, followed by continuous rinsing
with water for 3 h. The seeds were subsequently sown on soil
for production of M2 seeds, which were harvested into ten
pools. M2 plants, partially rescued for the lesion-mimic pheno-
type of syp121 syp122, were selected in the greenhouse.
Genetic Mapping
In order to generate mapping populations for the SSD genes,
the syp121–1 and syp122–1 mutant alleles were first back-
crossed into Ler. Thereby, a line with the typical syntaxin dou-
ble mutant phenotype was obtained, which we confirmed to
be homozygous Ler at several genetic marker loci on each of
chromosomes 1, 2, 4, and 5. Both SYP121 and SYP122 are lo-
cated on chromosome 3, and no effort was made to transfer
Ler DNA to this chromosome. F2 populations were generated
for each of the SSD genes (Col-0 syp121–1 syp122–1 ssd3Ler
syp121–1 syp122–1). Initial analyses of 22 rescued F2 plants
in each population using published genetic markers (Bell
and Ecker, 1994; Lukowitz et al., 2000) suggested map-
positions. Subsequent fine-mappings were performed using
the Cereon Col/Ler marker information (www.arabidopsis.
org/cereon/index.jsp).
Salicylic Acid Measurements
Extraction and determination of total (free plus glycosylated)
SA in shoots was performed by HPLC as described by Newman
et al. (2001).
Plant Treatments
The Arabidopsis powdery mildew fungus (Golovinomyces
cichoracearum, isolate UCSC1) was propagated on pumpkin
plants. Inoculations were performed as described by Collins
et al. (2003). SA treatment was performed by spraying plants
with 250 lM SA once a day for five consecutive days. The treat-
ment was initiated when the plants were 16 d old. Photos were
taken 1 d after the last treatment.
SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
Supplementary Data are available at Molecular Plant
Online.
FUNDING
Financial support has been provided by the Danish Agricul-
tural and Veterinary Research Council; the Danish Agency
for Science, Technology and Innovation; Carl Tryggers Founda-
tion, Sweden; the Carlsberg Foundation, Denmark; the Direc-
torate for Food, Fisheries and Agri Business, Denmark; the US
National Science Foundation; and the Carnegie Institution of
Science, USA.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank the Salk Institute Genomic Analysis Laboratory for pro-
viding the sequence-indexed Arabidopsis T-DNA insertion mutants.
We thank Dr Peter Hagedorn for initial analyses of the global tran-
script profiles, and Dr Dale Godfrey for critically reading the man-
uscript. We thank the undergraduate students Louise Flagstad,
Stine Petersen, Irene S. Rasmussen and Sabine B. Sørensen for map-
ping a mutant allele.
No conflict of interest declared.
REFERENCES
Assaad, F.F., et al. (2004). The PEN1 syntaxin defines a novel cellular
compartment upon fungal attack and is required for the timely
assembly of papillae. Mol. Biol. Cell 15, 5118–5129.
Bartsch, M., Gobbato, E., Bednarek, P., Debey, S., Schultze, J.L.,
Bautor, J., and Parker, J.E. (2006). Salicylic acid-independent EN-
HANCED DISEASE SUSCEPTIBILITY1 signaling in Arabidopsis im-
munity and cell death is regulated by the monooxygenase FMO1
and the Nudix hydrolase NUDT7. Plant Cell 18, 1038–1051.
Beckers, G.J., and Spoel, S.H. (2006). Fine-tuning plant defence sig-
nalling, salicylate versus jasmonate. Plant Biol. (Stuttg.) 8, 1–10.
Bell, C.J., and Ecker, J.R. (1994). Assignment of 30 microsatellite loci
to the linkage map of Arabidopsis. Genomics 19, 137–144.
Benavente, L.M., andAlonso, J.M. (2006). Molecular mechanisms of
ethylene signaling in Arabidopsis. Mol. Biosyst 2, 165–173.
524 | Zhang et al. d syp121 syp122 Unravels Signaling Network
Benschop, J.J., Mohammed, S., O’Flaherty, M., Heck, A.J.R.,
Slijper, M., and Menke, F.L.H. (2007). Quantitative phosphopro-
teomics of early elicitor signaling in Arabidopsis. Mol. Cell. Pro-
teom 6, 1198–1214.
Bohlmann, H., Vignutelli, A., Hilpert, B., Miersch, O.,
Wasternack, C., and Apel, K. (1998). Wounding and chemicals in-
duce expression of the Arabidopsis thaliana gene Thi2.1, encod-
ing a fungal defense thionin, via the octadecanoid pathway.
FEBS Lett 437, 281–286.
Bouchez, O., Huard, C., Lorrain, S., Roby, D., and Balague, C. (2007).
Ethylene is one of the key elements for cell death and defense
response control in the Arabidopsis lesion mimic mutant vad1.
Plant Physiol 145, 465–477.
Bowling, S.A., Clarke, J.D., Liu, Y., Klessig, D.F., and Dong, X. (1997).
The cpr5 mutant of Arabidopsis expresses both NPR1-dependent
and NPR1-independent resistance. Plant Cell 9, 1573–1584.
Brodersen, P., Malinovsky, F.G., Hematy, K., Newman, M.A., and
Mundy, J. (2005). The role of salicylic acid in the induction of cell
death in Arabidopsis acd11. Plant Physiol 138, 1037–1045.
Brodersen, P., Petersen, M., Pike, H.M., Olszak, B., Skov, S.,
Odum, N., Jorgensen, L.B., Brown, R.E., and Mundy, J. (2002).
Knockout of Arabidopsis ACCELERATED-CELL-DEATH11 encod-
ing a sphingosine transfer protein causes activation of pro-
grammed cell death and defense. Genes Dev 16, 490–502.
Broekaert, W.F., Delaure, S.L., De Bolle, M.F., and Cammue, B.P.
(2006). The role of ethylene in host-pathogen interactions.
Annu. Rev. Phytopathol 44, 393–416.
Cao, H., Glazebrook, J., Clarke, J.D., Volko, S., and Dong, X. (1997).
The Arabidopsis NPR1 gene that controls systemic acquired resis-
tance encodes a novel protein containing ankyrin repeats. Cell
88, 57–63.
Clarke, J.D., Volko, S.M., Ledford, H., Ausubel, F.M., and Dong, X.
(2000). Roles of salicylic acid, jasmonic acid, and ethylene in cpr-
induced resistance in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 12, 2175–2190.
Collins, N.C., et al. (2003). SNARE-protein-mediated disease resis-
tance at the plant cell wall. Nature 425, 973–977.
Desveaux, D., Subramaniam, R., Despres, C., Mess, J.N.,
Levesque, C., Fobert, P.R., Dangl, J.L., and Brisson, N. (2004). A
‘Whirly’ transcription factor is required for salicylic acid-
dependent disease resistance in Arabidopsis. Dev. Cell 6,
229–240.
Doelling, J.H., Walker, J.M., Friedman, E.M., Thompson, A.R., and
Vierstra, R.D. (2002). The APG8/12-activating enzyme APG7 is re-
quired for proper nutrient recycling and senescence inArabidop-
sis thaliana. J. Biol. Chem 277, 33105–33114.
Durrant, W.E., and Dong, X. (2004). Systemic acquired resistance.
Annu. Rev. Phytopathol 42, 185–209.
Feys, B., Benedetti, C.E., Penfold, C.N., and Turner, J.G. (1994). Ara-
bidopsis mutants selected for resistance to the phytotoxin coro-
natine are male sterile, insensitive to methyl jasmonate, and
resistant to a bacterial pathogen. Plant Cell 6, 751–759.
Foyer, C.H., and Noctor, G. (2005). Redox homeostasis and antiox-
idant signaling, a metabolic interface between stress perception
and physiological responses. Plant Cell 17, 1866–1875.
Fujiki, Y., Yoshimoto, K., and Ohsumi, Y. (2007). An Arabidopsis ho-
molog of yeast ATG6/VPS30 is essential for pollen germination.
Plant Physiol 143, 1132–1139.
Gautier, L., Cope, L., Bolstad, B.M., and Irizarry, R.A. (2004). Affy-
analysis of Affymetrix GeneChip data at the probe level. Bioin-
formatics 20, 307–315.
Gjetting, T., Hagedorn, P.H., Schweizer, P., Thordal-Christensen, H.,
Carver, T.L., and Lyngkjaer, M.F. (2007). Single-cell transcript pro-
filing of barley attacked by the powdery mildew fungus. Mol.
Plant-Microbe Interact 20, 235–246.
Glazebrook, J. (2005). Contrasting mechanisms of defense against
biotrophic and necrotrophic pathogens. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol
43, 205–227.
Hammond-Kosack, K.E., and Parker, J.E. (2003). Deciphering plant–
pathogen communication, fresh perspectives for molecular resis-
tance breeding. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol 14, 177–193.
Heck, S., Grau, T., Buchala, A., Metraux, J.-P., and Nawrath, C.
(2003). Genetic evidence that expression of NahG modifies de-
fense pathways independent of salicylic acid biosynthesis in
the Arabidopsis-Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato interaction.
Plant J 36, 342–352.
Heese, A., Ludwig, A.A., and Jones, J.D. (2005). Rapid phosphory-
lation of a syntaxin during the Avr9/Cf-9-race-specific signaling
pathway. Plant Physiol 138, 2406–2416.
Holt, B.F.,III, Belkhadir, Y., and Dangl, J.L. (2005). Antagonistic con-
trol of disease resistance protein stability in the plant immune
system. Science 309, 929–932.
Howles, P., Lawrence, G., Finnegan, J., McFadden, H., Ayliffe, M.,
Dodds, P., and Ellis, J. (2005). Autoactive alleles of the flax L6 rust
resistance gene induce non-race-specific rust resistance associ-
ated with the hypersensitive response. Mol. Plant-Microbe Inter-
act 18, 570–582.
Hunt, M.D., Delaney, T.P., Dietrich, R.A., Weymann, K.B., Dangl, J.L.,
and Ryals, J.A. (1997). Salicylate-independent lesion formation in
Arabidopsis lsd mutants. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact 10, 531–536.
Kalde, M., Nuhse, T.S., Findlay, K., and Peck, S.C. (2007). The syn-
taxin SYP132 contributes to plant resistance against bacteria
and secretion of pathogenesis-related protein 1. Proc. Natl Acad.
Sci. U S A 104, 11850–11855.
Koch, M., Vorwerk, S., Masur, C., Sharifi-Sirchi, G., Olivieri, N., and
Schlaich, N.L. (2006). A role for a flavin-containing mono-
oxygenase in resistance against microbial pathogens in Arabi-
dopsis. Plant J 47, 629–639.
Li, C., and Wong, W.H. (2001). Model-based analysis of oligonucle-
otide arrays: expression index computation and outlier detec-
tion. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U S A 98, 31–36.
Lipka, V., et al. (2005). Pre- and postinvasion defenses both contrib-
ute to nonhost resistance inArabidopsis. Science 310, 1180–1183.
Lipka, V., Kwon, C., and Panstruga, R. (2007). SNARE-ware, the role
of SNARE-domain proteins in plant biology. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev.
Biol 23, 147–174.
Liu, Y., Schiff, M., Czymmek, K., Talloczy, Z., Levine, B., and Dinesh-
Kumar, S.P. (2005). Autophagy regulates programmed cell death
during the plant innate immune response. Cell 121, 567–577.
Lorrain, S., Vailleau, F., Balague, C., and Roby, D. (2003). Lesion
mimic mutants, keys for deciphering cell death and defense
pathways in plants? Trends Plant Sci 8, 263–271.
Lukowitz, W., Gillmor, C.S., and Scheible, W.R. (2000). Positional
cloning in Arabidopsis: why it feels good to have a genome ini-
tiative working for you. Plant Physiol 123, 795–805.
Zhang et al. d syp121 syp122 Unravels Signaling Network | 525
Mishina, T.E., and Zeier, J. (2006). The Arabidopsis flavin-dependent
monooxygenase FMO1 is an essential component of biologically
induced systemic acquired resistance. Plant Physiol 141,
1666–1675.
Mur, L.A., Kenton, P., Atzorn, R., Miersch, O., and Wasternack, C.
(2006). The outcomes of concentration-specific interactions be-
tween salicylate and jasmonate signaling include synergy, antag-
onism, and oxidative stress leading to cell death. Plant Physiol
140, 249–262.
Nandi, A., Kachroo, P., Fukushige, H., Hildebrand, D.F., Klessig, D.F.,
and Shah, J. (2003). Ethylene and jasmonic acid signaling affect
the NPR1-independent expression of defense genes without
impacting resistance to Pseudomonas syringae and Peronospora
parasitica in the Arabidopsis ssi1 mutant. Mol Plant-Microbe In-
teract 16, 588–599.
Nawrath, C., Heck, S., Parinthawong, N., and Metraux, J.P. (2002).
EDS5, an essential component of salicylic acid-dependent signal-
ing for disease resistance in Arabidopsis, is a member of the
MATE transporter family. Plant Cell 14, 275–286.
Newman, M.A., von Roepenack-Lahaye, E., Parr, A., Daniels, M.J.,
and Dow, J.M. (2001). Induction of hydroxycinnamoyl-tyramine
conjugates in pepper by Xanthomonas campestris, a plant de-
fense response activated by hrp gene-dependent and hrp
gene-independent mechanisms. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact
14, 785–792.
Norman-Setterblad, C., Vidal, S., and Palva, E.T. (2000). Interacting
signal pathways control defense gene expression in Arabidopsis
in response to cell wall-degrading enzymes from Erwinia caroto-
vora. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact 13, 430–438.
Nuhse, T.S., Boller, T., and Peck, S.C. (2003). A plasma membrane
syntaxin is phosphorylated in response to the bacterial elicitor
flagellin. J. Biol. Chem 278, 45248–45254.
Oh, S.A., Park, J.H., Lee, G.I., Paek, K.H., Park, S.K., and Nam, H.G.
(1997). Identification of three genetic loci controlling leaf senes-
cence in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant J 12, 527–535.
Olszak, B., Malinovsky, F.G., Brodersen, P., Grell, M., Giese, H.,
Petersen, M., and Mundy, J. (2006). A putative flavin-containing
mono-oxygenase as a marker for certain defense and cell death
pathways. Plant Sci 170, 614–623.
Overmyer, K., Tuominen, H., Kettunen, R., Betz, C., Langebartels, C.,
Sandermann, H., and Kangasjarvi, J. (2000). Ozone-sensitive Ara-
bidopsis rcd1 mutant reveals opposite roles for ethylene and
jasmonate signaling pathways in regulating superoxide-
dependent cell death. Plant Cell 12, 1849–1862.
Park, J.H., Halitschke, R., Kim, H.B., Baldwin, I.T., Feldmann, K.A.,
and Feyereisen, R. (2002). A knock-out mutation in allene oxide
synthase results in male sterility and defective wound signal
transduction in Arabidopsis due to a block in jasmonic acid bio-
synthesis. Plant J 31, 1–12.
Penninckx, I.A.M.A., Thomma, B.P.H.J., Buchala, A., Metraux, J.P.,
and Broekaert,W.F. (1998). Concomitant activation of jasmonate
and ethylene response pathways is required for induction of
a plant defensin gene in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 10, 2103–2113.
Potter, S., Uknes, S., Lawton, K., Winter, A.M., Chandler, D.,
Dimaio, J., Novitzky, R., Ward, E., and Ryals, J. (1993). Regulation
of a hevein-like gene in Arabidopsis. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact
6, 680–685.
Raffaele, S., Rivas, S., and Roby, D. (2006). An essential role for
salicylic acid in AtMYB30-mediated control of the hypersensi-
tive cell death program in Arabidopsis. FEBS Lett 580,
3498–3504.
Rairdan, G.J., and Delaney, T.P. (2002). Role of salicylic acid and
NIM1/NPR1 in race-specific resistance in Arabidopsis. Genetics
161, 803–811.
Rao, M.V., Lee, H., Creelman, R.A., Mullet, J.E., and Davis, K.R.
(2000). Jasmonic acid signaling modulates ozone-induced hyper-
sensitive cell death. Plant Cell 12, 1633–1646.
Redman, J.C., Haas, B.J., Tanimoto, G., and Town, C.D. (2004). De-
velopment and evaluation of an Arabidopsis whole genome
Affymetrix probe array. Plant J 38, 545–561.
Shah, J., Tsui, F., and Klessig, D.F. (1997). Characterization of a sal-
icylic acid-insensitive mutant (sai1) of Arabidopsis thaliana, iden-
tified in a selective screen utilizing the SA-inducible expression
of the tms2 gene. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact 10, 69–78.
Shirasu, K., Nakajima, H., Rajasekhar, V.K., Dixon, R.A., and Lamb, C.
(1997). Salicylic acid potentiates an agonist-dependent gain con-
trol that amplifies pathogen signals in the activation of defense
mechanisms. Plant Cell 9, 261–270.
Song, J.T., Lu, H., and Greenberg, J.T. (2004a). Divergent roles in
Arabidopsis thaliana development and defense of two homolo-
gous genes, ABERRANT GROWTH AND DEATH2 and AGD2-LIKE
DEFENSE RESPONSE PROTEIN1, encoding novel aminotrans-
ferases. Plant Cell 16, 353–366.
Song, J.T., Lu, H.,McDowell, J.M., andGreenberg, J.T. (2004b). A key
role for ALD1 in activation of local and systemic defenses in Ara-
bidopsis. Plant J 40, 200–212.
Spoel, S.H., et al. (2003). NPR1 modulates cross-talk between salic-
ylate- and jasmonate-dependent defense pathways through
a novel function in the cytosol. Plant Cell 15, 760–770.
Staswick, P.E., and Tiryaki, I. (2004). The oxylipin signal jasmonic
acid is activated by an enzyme that conjugates it to isoleucine
in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 16, 2117–2127.
Stein, M., Dittgen, J., Sanchez-Rodriguez, C., Hou, B.H., Molina, A.,
Schulze-Lefert, P., Lipka, V., and Somerville, S. (2006). Arabidop-
sis PEN3/PDR8, an ATP binding cassette transporter, contributes
to nonhost resistance to inappropriate pathogens that enter by
direct penetration. Plant Cell 18, 731–746.
Stokes, T.L., Kunkel, B.N., and Richards, E.J. (2002). Epigenetic var-
iation in Arabidopsis disease resistance. Genes Dev 16, 171–182.
Takken, F.L.W., Albrecht, M., and Tameling, W.I.L. (2006). Resistance
proteins, molecular switches of plant defence. Curr. Opin. Plant
Biol 9, 383–390.
Tenhaken, R., and Rubel, C. (1997). Salicylic acid is needed in hyper-
sensitive cell death in soybean but does not act as a catalase in-
hibitor. Plant Physiol 115, 291–298.
Thibaud-Nissen, F., Wu, H., Richmond, T., Redman, J.C., Johnson, C.,
Green, R., Arias, J., and Town, C.D. (2006). Development of Ara-
bidopsis whole-genome microarrays and their application to the
discovery of binding sites for the TGA2 transcription factor in sal-
icylic acid-treated plants. Plant Journal 47, 152–162.
Thilmony, R., Underwood,W., andHe, S.Y. (2006). Genome-wide tran-
scriptional analysis of theArabidopsis thaliana interaction with the
plant pathogen Pseudomonas syringaepv. tomatoDC3000 and the
human pathogen Escherichia coli O157, H7. Plant J 46, 34–53.
526 | Zhang et al. d syp121 syp122 Unravels Signaling Network
Thomma, B.P.H.J., Eggermont, K., Tierens, K.F.M.J., and
Broekaert, W.F. (1999). Requirement of functional Ethylene-
Insensitive 2 gene for efficient resistance of Arabidopsis to infec-
tion by Botrytis cinerea. Plant Physiol 121, 1093–1101.
Torres, M.A., Dangl, J.L., and Jones, J.D. (2002). Arabidopsis
gp91phox homologues AtrbohD and AtrbohF are required for
accumulation of reactive oxygen intermediates in the plant de-
fense response. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U S A 99, 517–522.
Torres, M.A., Jones, J.D., and Dangl, J.L. (2005). Pathogen-induced,
NADPH oxidase-derived reactive oxygen intermediates suppress
spread of cell death in Arabidopsis thaliana. Nat. Genet 37,
1130–1134.
Truman, W., de Zabala, M.T., and Grant, M. (2006). Type III effectors
orchestrate a complex interplay between transcriptional net-
works to modify basal defence responses during pathogenesis
and resistance. Plant J 46, 14–33.
Tsutsui, T.,Morita-Yamamuro, C., Asada, Y.,Minami, E., Shibuya, N.,
Ikeda, A., and Yamaguchi, J. (2006). Salicylic acid and a chitin elic-
itor both control expression of the CAD1 gene involved in the
plant immunity of Arabidopsis. Biosci. Biotech. Biochem 70,
2042–2048.
Uquillas, C., Letelier, I., Blanco, F., Jordana, X., and Holuigue, L.
(2004). NPR1-independent activation of immediate early salicylic
acid-responsive genes in Arabidopsis. Mol. Plant-Microbe Inter-
act 17, 34–42.
Van Der Straeten, D., Rodrigues-Pousada, R.A., Villarroel, R.,
Hanley, S., Goodman, H.M., and Van Montagu, M. (1992). Clon-
ing, genetic mapping, and expression analysis of an Arabidopsis
thaliana gene that encodes 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate
synthase. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U S A 89, 9969–9973.
van Loon, L.C., Geraats, B.P., and Linthorst, H.J. (2006). Ethylene as
a modulator of disease resistance in plants. Trends Plant Sci 11,
184–191.
Weaver, L.M., Swiderski, M.R., Li, Y., and Jones, J.D.G. (2006). The
Arabidopsis thaliana TIR-NB-LRR R-protein, RPP1A: protein local-
ization and constitutive activation of defence by truncated
alleles in tobacco and Arabidopsis. Plant J 47, 829–840.
Wiermer, M., Feys, B.J., and Parker, J.E. (2005). Plant immunity, the
EDS1 regulatory node. Curr. Opin. Plant Bio 8, 383–389.
Wildermuth, M.C., Dewdney, J., Wu, G., and Ausubel, F.M. (2001).
Isochorismate synthase is required to synthesize salicylic acid for
plant defence. Nature 414, 562–565.
Workman, C., Jensen, L.J., Jarmer, H., Berka, R., Gautier, L.,
Nielsen, H.B., Saxild, H.H., Nielsen, C., Brunak, S., and
Knudsen, S. (2002). A new nonlinear normalization method for
reducing variability in DNA microarray experiments. Genome
Biology 3, research0048.1–0048.16.
Xiao, S., Calis, O., Patrick, E., Zhang, G., Charoenwattana, P.,
Muskett, P., Parker, J.E., and Turner, J.G. (2005). The atypical re-
sistance gene, RPW8, recruits components of basal defence for
powdery mildew resistance in Arabidopsis. Plant J 42, 95–110.
Xie, D.X., Feys, B.F., James, S., Nieto-Rostro, M., and Turner, J.G.
(1998). COI1, an Arabidopsis gene required for jasmonate-regu-
lated defense and fertility. Science 280, 1091–1094.
Yaeno, T., Saito, B., Katsuki, T., and Iba, K. (2006). Ozone-induced
expression of the Arabidopsis FAD7 gene requires salicylic acid,
but not NPR1 and SID2. Plant Cell Physiol 47, 355–362.
Yoshioka, K., Kachroo, P., Tsui, F., Sharma, S.B., Shah, J., and
Klessig, D.F. (2001). Environmentally sensitive, SA-dependent de-
fense responses in the cpr22 mutant of Arabidopsis. Plant J 26,
447–459.
Zhang,Y., Goritschnig, S., Dong,X., and Li, X. (2003). A gain-of-func-
tion mutation in a plant disease resistance gene leads to consti-
tutive activation of downstream signal transduction pathways in
suppressor of npr1-1, constitutive 1. Plant Cell 15, 2636–2646.
Zhang, Z., Feechan, A., Pedersen, C., Newman, M.A., Qiu, J.L.,
Olesen, K.L., and Thordal-Christensen, H. (2007). A SNARE-
protein has opposing functions in penetration resistance and de-
fence signalling pathways. Plant J 49, 302–312.
Zhong, G.Y., and Burns, J.K. (2003). Profiling ethylene-regulated
gene expression in Arabidopsis thaliana by microarray analysis.
Plant Mol. Biol 53, 117–131.
Zimmerli, L., Stein,M., Lipka, V., Schulze-Lefert, P., andSomerville, S.
(2004). Host and non-host pathogens elicit different jasmonate/
ethylene responses in Arabidopsis. Plant J 40, 633–646.
Zimmermann, P., Hirsch-Hoffmann, M., Hennig, L., and
Gruissem, W. (2004). GENEVESTIGATOR. Arabidopsis microarray
database and analysis toolbox. Plant Physiol 136, 2621–2632.
Zhang et al. d syp121 syp122 Unravels Signaling Network | 527
Top Related