Review
Genes controlling expression of defense responses in Arabidopsis — 2001 status

https://doi.org/10.1016/S1369-5266(00)00177-1Get rights and content

Abstract

In the past two years, the focus of studies of the genes controlling expression of defense responses in Arabidopsis has shifted from the identification of mutants to gene isolation and the ordering of genes within branches of the signal transduction networks. It is now clear that gene-for-gene resistance can be mediated through at least three genetically distinguishable pathways. Additional genes affecting salicylic-acid-dependent signaling have been identified, and double-mutant analyses have begun to reveal the order in which they act. Genes required for jasmonic-acid-dependent signaling and for induced systemic resistance have also been identified.

Introduction

Plants defend themselves from attack by microbial pathogens by activating a battery of defense responses after infection. Provided that they are activated with sufficient speed, these responses are generally quite effective in preventing disease. Consequently, there is considerable interest in understanding the signal transduction networks that control the activation of defense responses in plants. One approach to this problem is to use the powerful Arabidopsis genetic system to identify plant genes that have crucial roles in regulating the activation of defense responses. This article summarizes progress made using this system since the previous review of this topic was written [1]. A model describing the circuitry of the signal transduction network is presented in Fig. 1.

Gene-for-gene resistance is a particularly strong form of plant disease resistance. Plants carry specific resistance (R) genes that are able to recognize pathogens carrying corresponding avirulence (avr) genes. This reaction triggers a rapid defense response that generally includes the programmed cell death of plant cells that are in contact with the pathogen, a phenomenon called the hypersensitive response (HR). Widespread difficulties in detecting direct interactions between R and avr proteins have led to the hypothesis that R proteins ‘guard’ plant proteins (i.e. ‘guardees’) that are the targets of pathogen avr proteins, triggering the HR and other responses when avr–guardee interactions are detected [2]. The detection of an in vivo complex containing an R protein, an avr protein, and an unidentified plant protein is consistent with this hypothesis [3]. This article does not discuss the extensive literature concerning function of R proteins, but does describe signaling downstream from R protein function.

Activation of the HR triggers a systemic resistance response known as systemic acquired resistance (SAR). This response includes the accumulation of the signal molecule salicylic acid (SA) throughout the plant and the consequent expression of a characteristic set of defense genes, including PR-1. Plants expressing SAR are more resistant to subsequent attack by a variety of otherwise virulent pathogens. Many defense responses that are characteristic of SAR also contribute to local resistance that is mediated by some R genes, and to the local growth limitation of moderately virulent pathogens. In a large expression profiling experiment, at 48 hours after infection, the spectra of plant genes expressed in response to a virulent Peronospora parasitica isolate and an isolate that triggers gene-for-gene resistance were similar [4••]. Responses triggered by R genes generally occur much faster than responses to virulent pathogens; this presumably explains why virulent pathogens; this presumably explains why R-gene-mediated resistance is so effective.

Some defense responses are activated by signal transduction networks that require jasmonic acid (JA) and ethylene (ET) as signal molecules. Different pathogens are limited to different extents by SA-dependent responses and by JA/ET-dependent responses. There appears to be con-siderable cross-talk between these signal transduction networks, with at least some SA-dependent responses limited by JA/ET-dependent responses and vice versa.

Section snippets

R-gene signal transduction

Mutations in PBS1, NDR1, EDS1, PAD4, and PBS2 block gene-for-gene resistance that is mediated by some R genes. The only R gene known to be affected by PBS1 mutations is RPS5 [5]. This observation raises the intriguing possibility that PBS1 encodes the ‘guardee’ monitored by RPS5. As RPS5 and the corresponding avr gene, avrPphB, have both been isolated, it should be possible to test this hypothesis in the near future when PBS1 has been isolated.

R genes known to require NDR1 belong to the

SA-dependent signaling

SA-dependent signaling is important for some gene-for-gene resistance responses, for local responses that limit the growth of virulent pathogens, and for SAR. SAR is a resistance response that is activated throughout the plant in response to local infection by necrotizing pathogens. As described above, EDS1 and PAD4 act upstream of SA to promote SA accumulation. The ankyrin-repeat protein NPR1; also known as NIM1 (NON-INDUCIBLE IMMUNITY 1) and SAI1 (SALICYLIC ACID INSENSITIVE 1) acts downstream

Jasmonic acid/ethylene-dependent signaling

The role of JA and ET in the activation of disease resistance mechanisms was demonstrated by the observation that expression of the PDF1.2 gene and other genes was prevented by mutations that block JA signaling (i.e. coi1) or ethylene signaling (i.e. ein2). JA and ET seem to be required simultaneously, as PDF1.2 expression is not activated by either ET treatment of coi1 plants or JA treatment of ein2 plants [40]. Furthermore, resistance to the fungal pathogen Alternaria brassicicola is

Induced systemic resistance

Colonization of roots by certain rhizosphere bacteria confers a form of disease resistance called induced systemic resistance (ISR). ISR occurs in nahG plants, so it is not an SA-dependent phenomenon. No significant changes in plant gene expression have been associated with ISR. Nonetheless, progress has been made in the genetic dissection of this phenomenon. Several years ago, it was found that ISR requires NPR1. This is interesting as it implies that NPR1 is involved in perception of more

Genes not yet placed into pathways

Several interesting mutants have been described that probably affect disease resistance signaling but that are not yet characterized in sufficient detail to allow them to be placed in particular positions in the network. Two genes, HXC2 (Hypersensitivity to Xanthomonas campestris pv. campestris 2) and RXC5 (Resistance to Xanthomonas campestris 5), are required for resistance to a particular isolate of Xanthomonas campestris, implying that they may be part of a gene-for-gene resistance mechanism

Conclusions and future prospects

A major area of progress in the past year has been in elucidating the relative sites of action of signaling components in signal transduction cascades. On the basis of the different requirements of various R genes for other genes to mediate resistance, R-gene-dependent signaling has been resolved into at least three different pathways. New genes have been defined in the SA signaling pathway, and constitutive mutants have been useful in ordering components of the pathway.

There is still much work

Acknowledgements

I apologize to scientists whose work I overlooked or was not able to include because of length limitations.

References and recommended reading

Papers of particular interest, published within the annual period of review, have been highlighted as:

  • •of special interest

  • ••of outstanding interest

References (61)

  • A Falk et al.

    EDS1, an essential component of R gene-mediated disease resistance in Arabidopsis has homology to eukaryotic lipases

    Proc Natl Acad Sci USA

    (1999)
  • D Jirage et al.

    Arabidopsis thaliana PAD4 encodes a lipase-like gene that is important for salicylic acid signaling

    Proc Natl Acad Sci USA

    (1999)
  • J.D Clarke et al.

    Induced disease resistance requires EDS1 in the Arabidopsis mutants cpr1 and cpr6 but is only partially EDS1-dependent in cpr5

    Plant J

    (2001)
  • D Jirage et al.

    Constitutive salicylic acid-dependent signaling in cpr1 and cpr6 mutants requires PAD4

    Plant J

    (2001)
  • J.M McDowell et al.

    Downy mildew (Peronospora parasitica) resistance genes in Arabidopsis vary in functional requirements for NDR1, EDS1, NPR1, and salicylic acid accumulation

    Plant J

    (2000)
  • P.D Bittner-Eddy et al.

    The Arabidopsis downy mildew resistance gene, RPP13-Nd, functions independently of NDR1 and EDS1 and does not require the accumulation of salicylic acid

    Mol Plant Microbe Interact

    (2001)
  • J.M McDowell et al.

    Intragenic recombination and diversifying selection contribute to the evolution of downy mildew resistance at the RPP8 locus of Arabidopsis

    Plant Cell

    (1998)
  • P.D Bittner-Eddy et al.

    RPP13 is a simple locus in Arabidopsis thaliana for alleles that specify downy mildew resistance to different avirulence determinants in Personospora parasitica

    Plant J

    (2000)
  • M.B Cooley et al.

    Members of the Arabidopsis HRT/RPP8 family of resistance genes confer resistance to both viral and oomycete pathogens

    Plant Cell

    (2000)
  • P Kachroo et al.

    Resistance to turnip crinkle virus in Arabidopsis is regulated by two host genes and salicylic acid dependent but NPR1, ethylene, and jasmonate independent

    Plant Cell

    (2000)
  • S Xiao et al.

    Broadspectrum mildew resistance in Arabidopsis thaliana mediated by RPW8

    Science

    (2001)
  • K.S Century et al.

    NDR1, a pathogen-induced component required for Arabidopsis disease resistance

    Science

    (1997)
  • J Dewdney et al.

    Three unique mutants of Arabidopsis identify eds loci required for limiting growth of a biotrophic fungal pathogen

    Plant J

    (2000)
  • C Nawrath et al.

    Salicylic acid induction-deficient mutants of Arabidopsis express PR-2 and PR-5 and accumulate high levels of camalexin

    Plant Cell

    (1999)
  • V Gupta et al.

    Arabidopsis thaliana EDS4 contributes to salicylic acid (SA)-dependent expression of defense responses: evidence for inhibition of jasmonic acid signaling by SA

    Mol Plant Microbe Interact

    (2000)
  • N Zhou et al.

    PAD4 functions upstream from salicylic acid to control defense responses in Arabidopsis

    Plant Cell

    (1998)
  • C.A Frye et al.

    An Arabidopsis mutant with enhanced resistance to powdery mildew

    Plant Cell

    (1998)
  • C.A Frye et al.

    Negative regulation of defense responses in plants by a conserved MAPKK kinase

    Proc Natl Acad Sci USA

    (2000)
  • J.D Clarke et al.

    Roles of salicylic acid, jasmonic acid, and ethylene in cpr-induced resistance in Arabidopsis

    Plant Cell

    (2000)
  • R Mittler et al.

    Coordinated activation of programmed cell death and defense mechanisms in transgenic tobacco plants expressing a bacterial proton pump

    Plant Cell

    (1995)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text