Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (1)
Year of publication
- 2007 (1)
Document Type
- Doctoral Thesis (1) (remove)
Language
- English (1) (remove)
Keywords
- nitric oxide (1) (remove)
Institute
NO has been described as an important component involved in the development of the hypersensitive reaction (Delledonne et.al., 1998). Furthermore, NO induces expression of a set of defence gene, such as PR-1, PAL1 and chalcone synthase (CHS), and accumulation of SA (Durner et al., 1998). In this study, transgenic plants with altered NO levels were used to study the role of NO in plant defence. Arabidopsis plants which, due to expression of a bacterial NO dioxygenase, exhibit lower levels of NO than wild-type plants, show several weakened defence response, including the oxidative burst and expression of phenylpropanoid pathway genes. By contrast, constitutive expression of a bacterial NO synthase in Arabisopsis results in increased levels of endogenous NO. However, these plants do not show constitutively activated defence responses, but suffer from increased susceptibility to various strains of P. syringae. This might indicate that a gradient in NO production rather than constitutive elevation of NO is necessary to trigger plant defence responses. Nevertheless, NO seems to be important for regulation of the oxidative state in plant cells. This function of NO is important during leaf senescence. The data of the present work indicate that NO acts as senescence-delaying factor during plant development. The molecular action of NO in plants and signalling cascades in which NO is involved as second messenger are still poorly understood. Experiments addressing the selective quantification of NO in intact plant tissue, the identification of NO-target proteins as well as the function of NO-modified biomolecules might help to understand the role of NO in plants. Non-host resistance consists of several layers of defence that include preformed compounds existing in plants before pathogen infection and induced defences which the plant activates after recognition of a pathogen. The role of inducible defences in preventing multiplication of non-adapted bacteria is not clear. Our experiments suggest that to restrict non-adapted bacterial growth, pre-formed antimicrobial compounds and an early inducible cell wall-based defence might play an important role in Arabidopsis leaves. Upon inoculation with non-adapted bacteria, we have observed early, TTSS-independent up-regulation of PAL1 and BCB, two lignin biosynthesis genes which might be involved in papilla formation or other kinds of cell wall fortification. Moreover, Arabidopsis pal1 knockout lines permit significantly higher survival of non-adapted bacteria in leaves than wild-type plants, suggesting a functional importance of PAL1 up-regulation. Although non-host bacteria, like host bacteria, induce accumulation of SA and PR gene expression in a TTSS-dependent manner, SA-dependent or JA/ET-dependent defences do not directly contribute to non-host resistance. Moreover, non-adapted bacteria activate similar defence signalling pathways as do host bacteria. However, because of varieties in effector protein composition between different non-adapted bacterial strains, the activated signalling pathways might also include different compounds. The Arabidopsis ecotype Ler 0 is more susceptible to a non-adapted strain of P. syringae than ecotype Col-0. Although differences in glucosinolate content and composition between those ecotypes exist, they are probably not a major reason for the observed difference in non-host resistance. To further understand the mechanisms underlying non-host resistance, the generation of double or triple mutants with deficits in both cell wall-based defences and SA-dependent signal cascades is necessary. Moreover, the study of genome polymorphism and composition of secondary metabolites between Ler-0 and Col-0 can shed new light into the mechanisms of non-host resistance against bacterial pathogens. Additionally, experiments addressing papilla formation and callose biosynthesis in Ler-0 and Col-0 could help to further elucidate bacterial non-host resistance. Our data indicate that localized contact of Arabidopsis leaves with non-adapted bacteria, type III secretion-defective P. syringae strains and bacterial pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) induce systemic acquired resistance (SAR) at the whole plant level. This finding contrasts the general belief that an HR or other leaf necroses are required for SAR induction. The observed symptomless systemic response was abolished in all SAR-deficient mutants tested in this study, but was intact in the jar1 mutant, which is compromised in induction of ISR, indicating that non-host bacteria and PAMPs induce SAR in a mechanistically similar way than host bacteria. In addition, our data show that the extent of SA accumulation or PR gene expression induced at sites of virulent or avirulent P. syringae inoculation rather than the amount of tissue necroses or jasmonate accumulation determine the magnitude of SAR. The fact that systemic responses were also triggered after local treatment with type III secretion-defective P. syringae strains and bacterial PAMPs indicate that induction of SAR is TTSS-independent. Instead, recognition of general elicitors like flagellin and LPS play an important role in activation of the SAR process. To broaden the concept of PAMP-based SAR initiation, further general elicitors from bacteria and fungal pathogens should be tested for their capability to induce SAR. Screens for mutants with deficiency in SAR activation by individual PAMPs can help to identify new components involved in the SAR signalling cascade. Possible functions of PAMPs as mobile systemic signals should be tested in future experiments. By selection of candidate genes whose expression is up-regulated in Arabidopsis leaves infected with avirulent and virulent P. syringae and pathophysiological analyses of corresponding T-DNA knockout lines, FLAVIN-DEPENDENT MONOOXYGENASE1 (FMO1) was identified as a key SAR regulator. SAR triggered by P. syringae is completely abolished in fmo1 mutant plants, and pathogen-induced expression of FMO1 in systemic leaves is closely correlated with the capability of different Arabidopsis lines to develop SAR. According to our findings, we have proposed that the FMO1 acts in signal amplification in non-inoculated, systemic leaves to trigger SAR. Experimental verification of the postulated potential amplification cycle underlying SAR should be tested in future experiments. The generation of transgenic lines expressing FMO1::GFP will provide useful information about the cellular localization of the FMO1 protein. Moreover, a comparative metabolomic analysis using SAR-induced wild-type, fmo1 knockout and FMO1 overexpressing lines can be used to identify substrates and reaction products of the FMO1 monooxygenase. As the single yeast FMO (yFMO) provides oxidizing equivalents at the ER for correct protein folding, expression of FMO1 in yfmo mutant yeast combined with protein activity assays might indicate whether FMO1 exhibits functional similarities with yeast FMO, e.g. in assuring proper folding of ER-targeted proteins essential for SAR establishment. Identification of further genes involved in activation of systemic resistance and biochemical characterization of the corresponding proteins can help to understand the SAR process in more detail.