skip to main content


Search for: All records

Creators/Authors contains: "Zipfel, Cyril"

Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher. Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?

Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.

  1. Abstract

    Plant pathogens use effector proteins to target host processes involved in pathogen perception, immune signalling, or defence outputs. Unlike foliar pathogens, it is poorly understood how root‐invading pathogens suppress immunity. The Avr2 effector from the tomato root‐ and xylem‐colonizing pathogenFusarium oxysporumsuppresses immune signalling induced by various pathogen‐associated molecular patterns (PAMPs). It is unknown how Avr2 targets the immune system. TransgenicAVR2 Arabidopsis thalianaphenocopies mutants in which the pattern recognition receptor (PRR) co‐receptor BRI1‐ASSOCIATED RECEPTOR KINASE (BAK1) or its downstream signalling kinase BOTRYTIS‐INDUCED KINASE 1 (BIK1) are knocked out. We therefore tested whether these kinases are Avr2 targets. Flg22‐induced complex formation of the PRR FLAGELLIN SENSITIVE 2 and BAK1 occurred in the presence and absence of Avr2, indicating that Avr2 does not affect BAK1 function or PRR complex formation. Bimolecular fluorescence complementation assays showed that Avr2 and BIK1 co‐localize in planta. Although Avr2 did not affect flg22‐induced BIK1 phosphorylation, mono‐ubiquitination was compromised. Furthermore, Avr2 affected BIK1 abundance and shifted its localization from nucleocytoplasmic to the cell periphery/plasma membrane. Together, these data imply that Avr2 may retain BIK1 at the plasma membrane, thereby suppressing its ability to activate immune signalling. Because mono‐ubiquitination of BIK1 is required for its internalization, interference with this process by Avr2 could provide a mechanistic explanation for the compromised BIK1 mobility upon flg22 treatment. The identification of BIK1 as an effector target of a root‐invading vascular pathogen identifies this kinase as a conserved signalling component for both root and shoot immunity.

     
    more » « less
  2. Abstract

    A signaling complex comprising members of the LORELEI (LRE)-LIKE GPI-anchored protein (LLG) and Catharanthus roseus RECEPTOR-LIKE KINASE 1-LIKE (CrRLK1L) families perceive RAPID ALKALINIZATION FACTOR (RALF) peptides and regulate growth, reproduction, immunity, and stress responses in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana). Genes encoding these proteins are members of multigene families in most angiosperms and could generate thousands of signaling complex variants. However, the links between expansion of these gene families and the functional diversification of this critical signaling complex as well as the evolutionary factors underlying the maintenance of gene duplicates remain unknown. Here, we investigated LLG gene family evolution by sampling land plant genomes and explored the function and expression of angiosperm LLGs. We found that LLG diversity within major land plant lineages is primarily due to lineage-specific duplication events, and that these duplications occurred both early in the history of these lineages and more recently. Our complementation and expression analyses showed that expression divergence (i.e. regulatory subfunctionalization), rather than functional divergence, explains the retention of LLG paralogs. Interestingly, all but one monocot and all eudicot species examined had an LLG copy with preferential expression in male reproductive tissues, while the other duplicate copies showed highest levels of expression in female or vegetative tissues. The single LLG copy in Amborella trichopoda is expressed vastly higher in male compared to in female reproductive or vegetative tissues. We propose that expression divergence plays an important role in retention of LLG duplicates in angiosperms.

     
    more » « less
  3. null (Ed.)