2,675 research outputs found

    The phylogenetically-related pattern recognition receptors EFR and XA21 recruit similar immune signaling components in monocots and dicots

    Get PDF
    During plant immunity, surface-localized pattern recognition receptors (PRRs) recognize pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs). The transfer of PRRs between plant species is a promising strategy for engineering broad-spectrum disease resistance. Thus, there is a great interest in understanding the mechanisms of PRR-mediated resistance across different plant species. Two well-characterized plant PRRs are the leucine-rich repeat receptor kinases (LRR-RKs) EFR and XA21 from Arabidopsis thaliana (Arabidopsis) and rice, respectively. Interestingly, despite being evolutionary distant, EFR and XA21 are phylogenetically closely related and are both members of the sub-family XII of LRR-RKs that contains numerous potential PRRs. Here, we compared the ability of these related PRRs to engage immune signaling across the monocots-dicots taxonomic divide. Using chimera between Arabidopsis EFR and rice XA21, we show that the kinase domain of the rice XA21 is functional in triggering elf18-induced signaling and quantitative immunity to the bacteria Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato (Pto) DC3000 and Agrobacterium tumefaciens in Arabidopsis. Furthermore, the EFR:XA21 chimera associates dynamically in a ligand-dependent manner with known components of the EFR complex. Conversely, EFR associates with Arabidopsis orthologues of rice XA21-interacting proteins, which appear to be involved in EFR-mediated signaling and immunity in Arabidopsis. Our work indicates the overall functional conservation of immune components acting downstream of distinct LRR-RK-type PRRs between monocots and dicots

    Boundary Effective Field Theory and Trans-Planckian Perturbations: Astrophysical Implications

    Full text link
    We contrast two approaches to calculating trans-Planckian corrections to the inflationary perturbation spectrum: the New Physics Hypersurface [NPH] model, in which modes are normalized when their physical wavelength first exceeds a critical value, and the Boundary Effective Field Theory [BEFT] approach, where the initial conditions for all modes are set at the same time, and modified by higher dimensional operators enumerated via an effective field theory calculation. We show that these two approaches -- as currently implemented -- lead to radically different expectations for the trans-Planckian corrections to the CMB and emphasize that in the BEFT formalism we expect the perturbation spectrum to be dominated by quantum gravity corrections for all scales shorter than some critical value. Conversely, in the NPH case the quantum effects only dominate the longest modes that are typically much larger than the present horizon size. Furthermore, the onset of the breakdown in the standard inflationary perturbation calculation predicted by the BEFT formalism is likely to be associated with a feature in the perturbation spectrum, and we discuss the observational signatures of this feature in both CMB and large scale structure observations. Finally, we discuss possible modifications to both calculational frameworks that would resolve the contradictions identified here.Comment: Reworded commentary, reference added (v2) References added (v3

    Large Nongaussianity from Nonlocal Inflation

    Full text link
    We study the possibility of obtaining large nongaussian signatures in the Cosmic Microwave Background in a general class of single-field nonlocal hill-top inflation models. We estimate the nonlinearity parameter f_{NL} which characterizes nongaussianity in such models and show that large nongaussianity is possible. For the recently proposed p-adic inflation model we find that f_{NL} ~ 120 when the string coupling is order unity. We show that large nongaussianity is also possible in a toy model with an action similar to those which arise in string field theory.Comment: 27 pages, no figures. Added references and some clarifying remark

    Search for B→πℓ+ℓ−B \to \pi \ell^+\ell^- Decays at Belle

    Full text link
    We present a search for the B-> pi e^+ e^- and B-> pi \mu^+ \mu^- decays, with a data sample of 657 million BBbar pairs collected with the Belle detector at the KEKB e+e−e^+e^- collider. Signal events are reconstructed from a charged or a neutral pion candidate and a pair of oppositely charged electrons or muons. No significant signal is observed and we set the upper limit on the isospin-averaged branching fraction BF(B -> \pi \ell^+\ell^-) < 6.2x10^-8 at the 90% confidence level.Comment: 8 pages, 3 figures, accepted by PRD(RC

    Observation of B_s to phi gamma and Search for B_s to gamma gamma Decays at Belle

    Full text link
    We search for the radiative penguin decays B_s to phi gamma and B_s to gamma gamma in a 23.6 fb-1 data sample collected at the Upsilon(5S) resonance with the Belle detector at the KEKB e+e- asymmetric-energy collider. We observe for the first time a radiative penguin decay of the B_s meson in the B_s to phi gamma mode. No significant B_s to gamma gamma signal is observed.Comment: 5 pages, 3 figures, accepted by Physics Review Letter

    Measurement of the decay B0→π−ℓ+ÎœB^0\to\pi^-\ell^+\nu and determination of ∣Vub∣|V_{ub}|

    Full text link
    We present a measurement of the charmless semileptonic decay B0→π−ℓ+ÎœB^0\to\pi^-\ell^+\nu using a data sample containing 657×106\times 10^6 BBˉB\bar{B} events collected with the Belle detector at the KEKB asymmetric-energy e+e−e^+e^- collider operating near the ΄(4S)\Upsilon(4S) resonance. We determine the total branching fraction of the decay, B(B0→π−ℓ+Îœ)=(1.49±0.04(stat)±0.07(syst))×10−4\mathcal{B}(B^0\to\pi^-\ell^+\nu)=(1.49\pm 0.04{(\mathrm{stat})}\pm 0.07{(\mathrm{syst})})\times 10^{-4}. We also report a new precise measurement of the differential decay rate, and extract the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-Maskawa matrix element ∣Vub∣|V_{ub}| using model-independent and -dependent approaches. From a simultaneous fit to the measured differential decay rate and lattice QCD results, we obtain ∣Vub∣=(3.43±0.33)×10−3|V_{ub}|=(3.43\pm 0.33)\times 10^{-3}, where the error includes both statistical and systematic uncertainties.Comment: 8 pages, 3 figures, Submitted to PRD(RC
    • 

    corecore