Distinct roles for Arabidopsis SUMO protease ESD4 and its closest homolog ELS1

SUMO conjugation affects a broad range of processes in Arabidopsis thaliana, including flower initiation, pathogen defense, and responses to cold, drought and salt stress. We investigated two sequence-related SUMO-specific proteases that are both widely expressed and show that they differ significantly in their properties. The closest homolog of SUMO protease ESD4, ESD4-LIKE SUMO PROTEASE 1 (ELS1, alternatively called AtULP1a) has SUMO-specific proteolytic activity, but is functionally distinct from ESD4, as shown by intracellular localization, mutant phenotype and heterologous expression in yeast mutants. Furthermore, we show that the growth defects caused by loss of ESD4 function are not due to increased synthesis of the stress signal salicylic acid, as was previously shown for a SUMO ligase, indicating that impairment of the SUMO system affects plant growth in different ways. Our results demonstrate that two A. thaliana SUMO proteases showing close sequence similarity have distinct in vivo functions

Normalization of the Lymph Node T Cell Stromal Microenvironment in lpr/lpr Mice Is Associated with SU5416-Induced Reduction in Autoantibodies

The vascular-stromal elements of lymph nodes can play important roles in regulating the activities of the lymphocytes within. During model immune responses, the vascular-stromal compartment has been shown to undergo proliferative expansion and functional alterations. The state of the vascular-stromal compartment and the potential importance of this compartment in a spontaneous, chronic model of autoimmunity have not been well studied. Here, we characterize the vascular expansion in MRL-lpr/lpr lymph nodes and attempt to ask whether inhibiting this expansion can interfere with autoantibody generation. We show that characteristics of vascular expansion in enlarging MRL-lpr/lpr lymph nodes resemble that of the VEGF-dependent expansion that occurs in wild-type mice after model immunization. Surprisingly, treatment with SU5416, an inhibitor of VEGF and other receptor tyrosine kinases, did not have sustained effects in inhibiting vascular growth, but attenuated the anti-dsDNA response and altered the phenotype of the double negative T cells that are expanded in these mice. In examining for anatomic correlates of these immunologic changes, we found that the double negative T cells are localized within ectopic follicles around a central B cell patch and that these T cell-rich areas lack the T zone stromal protein ER-TR7 as well as other elements of a normal T zone microenvironment. SU5416 treatment disrupted these follicles and normalized the association between T zone microenvironmental elements and T cell-rich areas. Recent studies have shown a regulatory role for T zone stromal elements. Thus, our findings of the association of anti-dsDNA responses, double negative T cell phenotype, and altered lymphocyte microenvironment suggest the possibility that lymphocyte localization in ectopic follicles protects them from regulation by T zone stromal elements and functions to maintain autoimmune responses. Potentially, altering the lymphocyte microenvironment that is set up by the vascular-stromal compartment can be a means by which to control undesired autoimmune responses

The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship

There is an urgent need to improve the infrastructure supporting the reuse of scholarly data. A diverse set of stakeholders—representing academia, industry, funding agencies, and scholarly publishers—have come together to design and jointly endorse a concise and measureable set of principles that we refer to as the FAIR Data Principles. The intent is that these may act as a guideline for those wishing to enhance the reusability of their data holdings. Distinct from peer initiatives that focus on the human scholar, the FAIR Principles put specific emphasis on enhancing the ability of machines to automatically find and use the data, in addition to supporting its reuse by individuals. This Comment is the first formal publication of the FAIR Principles, and includes the rationale behind them, and some exemplar implementations in the community

Fair principles: Interpretations and implementation considerations

The FAIR principles have been widely cited, endorsed and adopted by a broad range of stakeholders since their publication in 2016. By intention, the 15 FAIR guiding principles do not dictate specific technological implementations, but provide guidance for improving Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability and Reusability of digital resources. This has likely contributed to the broad adoption of the FAIR principles, because individual stakeholder communities can implement their own FAIR solutions. However, it has also resulted in inconsistent interpretations that carry the risk of leading to incompatible implementations. Thus, while the FAIR principles are formulated on a high level and may be interpreted and implemented in different ways, for true interoperability we need to support convergence in implementation choices that are widely accessible and (re)-usable. We introduce the concept of FAIR implementation considerations to assist accelerated global participation and convergence towards accessible, robust, widespread and consistent FAIR implementations. Any self-identified stakeholder community may either choose to reuse solutions from existing implementations, or when they spot a gap, accept the challenge to create the needed solution, which, ideally, can be used again by other communities in the future. Here, we provide interpretations and implementation considerations (choices and challenges) for each FAIR principle

FAIR Principles: Interpretations and Implementation Considerations

The FAIR principles have been widely cited, endorsed and adopted by a broad range of stakeholders since their publication in 2016. By intention, the 15 FAIR guiding principles do not dictate specific technological implementations, but provide guidance for improving Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability and Reusability of digital resources. This has likely contributed to the broad adoption of the FAIR principles, because individual stakeholder communities can implement their own FAIR solutions. However, it has also resulted in inconsistent interpretations that carry the risk of leading to incompatible implementations. Thus, while the FAIR principles are formulated on a high level and may be interpreted and implemented in different ways, for true interoperability we need to support convergence in implementation choices that are widely accessible and (re)-usable. We introduce the concept of FAIR implementation considerations to assist accelerated global participation and convergence towards accessible, robust, widespread and consistent FAIR implementations. Any self-identified stakeholder community may either choose to reuse solutions from existing implementations, or when they spot a gap, accept the challenge to create the needed solution, which, ideally, can be used again by other communities in the future. Here, we provide interpretations and implementation considerations (choices and challenges) for each FAIR principle

FAIR Principles: Interpretations and implementation considerations

The FAIR principles have been widely cited, endorsed and adopted by a broad range of stakeholders since their publication in 2016. By intention, the 15 FAIR guiding principles do not dictate specific technological implementations, but provide guidance for improving Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability and Reusability of digital resources. This has likely contributed to the broad adoption of the FAIR principles, because individual stakeholder communities can implement their own FAIR solutions. However, it has also resulted in inconsistent interpretations that carry the risk of leading to incompatible implementations. Thus, while the FAIR principles are formulated on a high level and may be interpreted and implemented in different ways, for true interoperability we need to support convergence in implementation choices that are widely accessible and (re)-usable. We introduce the concept of FAIR implementation considerations to assist accelerated global participation and convergence towards accessible, robust, widespread and consistent FAIR implementations. Any self-identified stakeholder community may either choose to reuse solutions from existing implementations, or when they spot a gap, accept the challenge to create the needed solution, which, ideally, can be used again by other communities in the future. Here, we provide interpretations and implementation considerations (choices and challenges) for each FAIR principle