N-rich protein (NRP)-mediated cell death signaling

Upon disruption of ER homeostasis, plant cells activate at least two branches of the unfolded protein response (UPR) through IRE1-like and ATAF6-like transducers, resulting in the upregulation of ER-resident molecular chaperones and the activation of the ER-associated degradation protein system. Here, we discuss a new ER stress response pathway in plants that is associated with an osmotic stress response in transducing a cell death signal. Both ER and osmotic stress induce the expression of the novel transcription factor GmERD15, which binds and activates N-rich protein (NRP) promoters to induce NRP expression and cause the upregulation of GmNAC6, an effector of the cell death response. In contrast to this activation mechanism, the ER-resident molecular chaperone binding protein (BiP) attenuates the propagation of the cell death signal by modulating the expression and activity of components of the ER and osmotic stress-induced NRP-mediated cell death signaling. This interaction attenuates dehydration-induced cell death and promotes a better adaptation of BiP-overexpressing transgenic lines to drought

The ribosomal protein L10/QM-like protein is a component of the NIK-mediated antiviral signaling

The NIK (NSP-interacting kinase)-mediated antiviral signaling pathway was identified as a virulence target of the begomovirus nuclear shuttle protein (NSP). Here, we further characterized this layer of plant innate defense by identifying the ribosomal protein L10 (rpL10), a QM-like protein, as a downstream effector of the antiviral signaling. Although both ribosomal proteins rpL10 and rpL18 were found to associate with NIK1 through yeast two-hybrid screening, the NIK receptors specifically phosphorylated rpL10 in vitro. Furthermore, loss of rpL10 function significantly increased susceptibility to begomovirus infection, recapitulating the phenotype of nik knockout lines. Our results genetically linked rpL10 to the NIK-mediated antiviral signaling

Translational control in plant antiviral immunity

Due to the limited coding capacity of viral genomes, plant viruses depend extensively on the host cell machinery to support the viral life cycle and, thereby, interact with a large number of host proteins during infection. Within this context, as plant viruses do not harbor translation-required components, they have developed several strategies to subvert the host protein synthesis machinery to produce rapidly and efficiently the viral proteins. As a countermeasure against infection, plants have evolved defense mechanisms that impair viral infections. Among them, the host-mediated translational suppression has been characterized as an efficient mean to restrict infection. To specifically suppress translation of viral mRNAs, plants can deploy susceptible recessive resistance genes, which encode translation initiation factors from the eIF4E and eIF4G family and are required for viral mRNA translation and multiplication. Additionally, recent evidence has demonstrated that, alternatively to the cleavage of viral RNA targets, host cells can suppress viral protein translation to silence viral RNA. Finally, a novel strategy of plant antiviral defense based on suppression of host global translation, which is mediated by the transmembrane immune receptor NIK1 (nuclear shuttle protein (NSP)-Interacting Kinase1), is discussed in this review

Translational control in plant antiviral immunity

Abstract Due to the limited coding capacity of viral genomes, plant viruses depend extensively on the host cell machinery to support the viral life cycle and, thereby, interact with a large number of host proteins during infection. Within this context, as plant viruses do not harbor translation-required components, they have developed several strategies to subvert the host protein synthesis machinery to produce rapidly and efficiently the viral proteins. As a countermeasure against infection, plants have evolved defense mechanisms that impair viral infections. Among them, the host-mediated translational suppression has been characterized as an efficient mean to restrict infection. To specifically suppress translation of viral mRNAs, plants can deploy susceptible recessive resistance genes, which encode translation initiation factors from the eIF4E and eIF4G family and are required for viral mRNA translation and multiplication. Additionally, recent evidence has demonstrated that, alternatively to the cleavage of viral RNA targets, host cells can suppress viral protein translation to silence viral RNA. Finally, a novel strategy of plant antiviral defense based on suppression of host global translation, which is mediated by the transmembrane immune receptor NIK1 (nuclear shuttle protein (NSP)-Interacting Kinase1), is discussed in this review

Differential expression of the soybean BiP gene family

The soybean binding protein (BiP) gene family consists of at least four members designated soyBiPA, soyBiPB, soyBiPC and soyBiPD. We have performed immunoblotting of two-dimensional (2D) gels and RT-PCR assays with gene-specific primers to analyze the differential expression of this gene family in various soybean organs. The 2D gel profiles of the BiP forms from different organs were distinct and suggested that the BiP genes are under organ-specific regulation. In fact, while all four BiP transcripts were detected in leaves by gene-specific reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assays, different subsets were detected in the other organs. The soyBiPD was expressed in all organs, whereas the expression of the soyBiPB was restricted to leaves. The soyBiPA transcripts were detected in leaves, roots and seeds and soyBiPC RNA was confined to leaves, seeds and pods. Our data are consistent with organ-specific expression of the soybean BiP gene family

Combinatorial regulation modules on GmSBP2 promoter: a distal cis-regulatory domain confines the SBP2 promoter activity to the vascular tissue in vegetative organs

The Glycine max sucrose binding protein (GmSBP2) promoter directs phloem-specific expression of reporter genes in transgenic tobacco. Here, we identified cis-regulatory domains (CRD) that contribute with positive and negative regulation for the tissue-specific pattern of the GmSPB2 promoter. Negative regulatory elements in the distal CRD-A (−2000 to −700) sequences suppressed expression from the GmSBP2 promoter in tissues other than seed tissues and vascular tissues of vegetative organs. Deletion of this region relieved repression resulting in a constitutive promoter highly active in all tissues analyzed. Further deletions from the strong constitutive −700GmSBP2 promoter delimited several intercalating enhancer-like and repressing domains that function in a context-dependent manner. Histochemical examination revealed that the CRD-C (−445 to −367) harbors both negative and positive elements. This region abolished promoter expression in roots and in all tissues of stems except for the inner phloem. In contrast, it restores root meristem expression when fused to the −132pSBP2-GUS construct, which contains root meristem expression-repressing determinants mapped to the 44-bp CRD-G (−136 to −92). Thus, the GmSBP2 promoter is functionally organized into a proximal region with the combinatorial modular configuration of plant promoters and a distal domain, which restricts gene expression to the vascular tissues in vegetative organs