Insights into Cross-Kingdom Plant Pathogenic Bacteria

Plant and human pathogens have evolved disease factors to successfully exploit their respective hosts. Phytopathogens utilize specific determinants that help to breach reinforced cell walls and manipulate plant physiology to facilitate the disease process, while human pathogens use determinants for exploiting mammalian physiology and overcoming highly developed adaptive immune responses. Emerging research, however, has highlighted the ability of seemingly dedicated human pathogens to cause plant disease, and specialized plant pathogens to cause human disease. Such microbes represent interesting systems for studying the evolution of cross-kingdom pathogenicity, and the benefits and tradeoffs of exploiting multiple hosts with drastically different morphologies and physiologies. This review will explore cross-kingdom pathogenicity, where plants and humans are common hosts. We illustrate that while cross-kingdom pathogenicity appears to be maintained, the directionality of host association (plant to human, or human to plant) is difficult to determine. Cross-kingdom human pathogens, and their potential plant reservoirs, have important implications for the emergence of infectious diseases

Membrane Recruitment of Scaffold Proteins Drives Specific Signaling

Cells must give the right response to each stimulus they receive. Scaffolding, a signaling process mediated by scaffold proteins, participates in the decoding of the cues by specifically directing signal transduction. The aim of this paper is to describe the molecular mechanisms of scaffolding, i.e. the principles by which scaffold proteins drive a specific response of the cell. Since similar scaffold proteins are found in many species, they evolved according to the purpose of each organism. This means they require adaptability. In the usual description of the mechanisms of scaffolding, scaffold proteins are considered as reactors where molecules involved in a cascade of reactions are simultaneously bound with the right orientation to meet and interact. This description is not realistic: (i) it is not verified by experiments and (ii) timing and orientation constraints make it complex which seems to contradict the required adaptability. A scaffold protein, Ste5, is used in the MAPK pathway of Saccharomyces Cerevisiae for the cell to provide a specific response to stimuli. The massive amount of data available for this pathway makes it ideal to investigate the actual mechanisms of scaffolding. Here, a complete treatment of the chemical reactions allows the computation of the distributions of all the proteins involved in the MAPK pathway when the cell receives various cues. These distributions are compared to several experimental results. It turns out that the molecular mechanisms of scaffolding are much simpler and more adaptable than previously thought in the reactor model. Scaffold proteins bind only one molecule at a time. Then, their membrane recruitment automatically drives specific, amplified and localized signal transductions. The mechanisms presented here, which explain how the membrane recruitment of a protein can produce a drastic change in the activity of cells, are generic and may be commonly used in many biological processes

Mitogen-activated protein kinases with distinct requirements for Ste5 scaffolding influence signaling specificity in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Scaffold proteins are believed to enhance specificity in cell signaling when different pathways share common components. The prototype scaffold Ste5 binds to multiple components of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae mating pheromone response pathway, thereby conducting the mating signal to the Fus3 mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK). Some of the kinases that Ste5 binds to, however, are also shared with other pathways. Thus, it has been presumed that Ste5 prevents its bound kinases from transgressing into other pathways and protects them from intrusions from those pathways. Here we found that Fus3 MAPK required Ste5 scaffolding to receive legitimate signals from the mating pathway as well as misdirected signals leaking from other pathways. Furthermore, increasing the cellular concentration of active Ste5 enhanced the channeling of inappropriate stimuli to Fus3. This aberrant signal crossover resulted in the erroneous induction of cell cycle arrest and mating. In contrast to Fus3, the Kss1(MAPK) did not require Ste5 scaffolding to receive either authentic or leaking signals. Furthermore, the Ste11 kinase, once activated via Ste5, was able to signal to Kss1 independently of Ste5 scaffolding. These results argue that Ste5 does not act as a barrier that actively prevents signal crossover to Fus3 and that Ste5 may not effectively sequester its activated kinases away from other pathways. Rather, we suggest that specificity in this network is promoted by the selective activation of Ste5 and the distinct requirements of the MAPKs for Ste5 scaffolding