A chloroplast retrograde signal, 3'-phosphoadenosine 5'-phosphate, acts as a secondary messenger in abscisic acid signaling in stomatal closure and germination

  1. Wannarat Pornsiriwong
  2. Gonzalo M Estavillo
  3. Kai Xun Chan
  4. Estee E Tee
  5. Diep Ganguly
  6. Peter A Crisp
  7. Su Yin Phua
  8. Chenchen Zhao
  9. Jiaen Qiu
  10. Jiyoung Park
  11. Miing Tiem Yong
  12. Nazia Nisar
  13. Arun Kumar Yadav
  14. Benjamin Schwessinger
  15. John Rathjen
  16. Christopher I Cazzonelli
  17. Philippa B Wilson
  18. Matthew Gilliham
  19. Zhong-Hua Chen
  20. Barry J Pogson  Is a corresponding author
  1. Faculty of Science, Kasetsart University, Thailand
  2. CSIRO Agriculture, Australia
  3. The Australian National University, Australia
  4. Western Sydney University, Australia
  5. University of Adelaide, Australia
  6. University of California, San Diego, United States

Abstract

Organelle-nuclear retrograde signaling regulates gene expression, but its roles in specialized cells and integration with hormonal signaling remain enigmatic. Here we show that the SAL1-PAP (3′-phosphoadenosine 5′- phosphate) retrograde pathway interacts with abscisic acid (ABA) signaling to regulate stomatal closure and seed germination in Arabidopsis. Genetically or exogenously manipulating PAP bypasses the canonical signaling components ABA Insensitive 1 (ABI1) and Open Stomata 1 (OST1); priming an alternative pathway that restores ABA-responsive gene expression, ROS bursts, ion channel function, stomatal closure and drought tolerance in ost1-2. PAP also inhibits wild type and abi1-1 seed germination by enhancing ABA sensitivity. PAP-XRN signaling interacts with ABA, ROS and Ca2+; up-regulating multiple ABA signaling components, including lowly-expressed Calcium Dependent Protein Kinases (CDPKs) capable of activating the anion channel SLAC1. Thus, PAP exhibits many secondary messenger attributes and exemplifies how retrograde signals can have broader roles in hormone signaling, allowing chloroplasts to fine-tune physiological responses.

Data availability

The following data sets were generated
The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Wannarat Pornsiriwong

    Department of Biochemistry, Faculty of Science, Kasetsart University, Bangkok, Thailand
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Gonzalo M Estavillo

    CSIRO Agriculture, Canberra, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Kai Xun Chan

    ARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, The Australian National University, Acton, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Estee E Tee

    ARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, The Australian National University, Acton, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Diep Ganguly

    ARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, The Australian National University, Acton, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Peter A Crisp

    ARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, The Australian National University, Acton, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3655-0130
  7. Su Yin Phua

    ARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, The Australian National University, Acton, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Chenchen Zhao

    School of Science and Health, Western Sydney University, Richmond, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Jiaen Qiu

    ARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Jiyoung Park

    Division of Biological Sciences, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Miing Tiem Yong

    School of Science and Health, Western Sydney University, Richmond, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Nazia Nisar

    ARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, The Australian National University, Acton, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Arun Kumar Yadav

    ARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, The Australian National University, Acton, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Benjamin Schwessinger

    Research School of Biology, The Australian National University, Acton, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. John Rathjen

    Research School of Biology, The Australian National University, Acton, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Christopher I Cazzonelli

    Hawkesbury Institute for the Environment, Western Sydney University, Richmond, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Philippa B Wilson

    ARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, The Australian National University, Acton, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Matthew Gilliham

    ARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0666-3078
  19. Zhong-Hua Chen

    School of Science and Health, Western Sydney University, Richmond, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  20. Barry J Pogson

    ARC Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, The Australian National University, Acton, Australia
    For correspondence
    barry.pogson@anu.edu.au
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1869-2423

Funding

Australian Research Council (CE140100008)

  • Wannarat Pornsiriwong
  • Gonzalo M Estavillo
  • Kai Xun Chan
  • Estee E Tee
  • Diep Ganguly
  • Peter A Crisp
  • Su Yin Phua
  • Jiaen Qiu
  • Nazia Nisar
  • Arun Kumar Yadav
  • Christopher I Cazzonelli
  • Philippa B Wilson
  • Matthew Gilliham

National Institutes of Health (GM060396)

  • Jiyoung Park

Human Frontier Science Program

  • Jiyoung Park

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Dominique C Bergmann, Stanford University/HHMI, United States

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All experimentation involving Xenopus oocytes were performed in strict accordance to the University of Adelaide ethics committee guidelines. All Xenopus experiments received ethical approval (Animal Ethics Application # S-2014-192, University of Adelaide).

Version history

  1. Received: November 16, 2016
  2. Accepted: March 16, 2017
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: March 21, 2017 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: April 26, 2017 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record updated: May 5, 2017 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2017, Pornsiriwong et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 5,228
    views
  • 1,263
    downloads
  • 114
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Wannarat Pornsiriwong
  2. Gonzalo M Estavillo
  3. Kai Xun Chan
  4. Estee E Tee
  5. Diep Ganguly
  6. Peter A Crisp
  7. Su Yin Phua
  8. Chenchen Zhao
  9. Jiaen Qiu
  10. Jiyoung Park
  11. Miing Tiem Yong
  12. Nazia Nisar
  13. Arun Kumar Yadav
  14. Benjamin Schwessinger
  15. John Rathjen
  16. Christopher I Cazzonelli
  17. Philippa B Wilson
  18. Matthew Gilliham
  19. Zhong-Hua Chen
  20. Barry J Pogson
(2017)
A chloroplast retrograde signal, 3'-phosphoadenosine 5'-phosphate, acts as a secondary messenger in abscisic acid signaling in stomatal closure and germination
eLife 6:e23361.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23361

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23361

Further reading

    1. Plant Biology
    Ivan Kulich, Julia Schmid ... Jiří Friml
    Research Article

    Root gravitropic bending represents a fundamental aspect of terrestrial plant physiology. Gravity is perceived by sedimentation of starch-rich plastids (statoliths) to the bottom of the central root cap cells. Following gravity perception, intercellular auxin transport is redirected downwards leading to an asymmetric auxin accumulation at the lower root side causing inhibition of cell expansion, ultimately resulting in downwards bending. How gravity-induced statoliths repositioning is translated into asymmetric auxin distribution remains unclear despite PIN auxin efflux carriers and the Negative Gravitropic Response of roots (NGR) proteins polarize along statolith sedimentation, thus providing a plausible mechanism for auxin flow redirection. In this study, using a functional NGR1-GFP construct, we visualized the NGR1 localization on the statolith surface and plasma membrane (PM) domains in close proximity to the statoliths, correlating with their movements. We determined that NGR1 binding to these PM domains is indispensable for NGR1 functionality and relies on cysteine acylation and adjacent polybasic regions as well as on lipid and sterol PM composition. Detailed timing of the early events following graviperception suggested that both NGR1 repolarization and initial auxin asymmetry precede the visible PIN3 polarization. This discrepancy motivated us to unveil a rapid, NGR-dependent translocation of PIN-activating AGCVIII kinase D6PK towards lower PMs of gravity-perceiving cells, thus providing an attractive model for rapid redirection of auxin fluxes following gravistimulation.

    1. Plant Biology
    Daniel S Yu, Megan A Outram ... Simon J Williams
    Research Article

    Plant pathogens secrete proteins, known as effectors, that function in the apoplast or inside plant cells to promote virulence. Effector recognition by cell-surface or cytosolic receptors results in the activation of defence pathways and plant immunity. Despite their importance, our general understanding of fungal effector function and recognition by immunity receptors remains poor. One complication often associated with effectors is their high sequence diversity and lack of identifiable sequence motifs precluding prediction of structure or function. In recent years, several studies have demonstrated that fungal effectors can be grouped into structural classes, despite significant sequence variation and existence across taxonomic groups. Using protein X-ray crystallography, we identify a new structural class of effectors hidden within the secreted in xylem (SIX) effectors from Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. lycopersici (Fol). The recognised effectors Avr1 (SIX4) and Avr3 (SIX1) represent the founding members of the Fol dual-domain (FOLD) effector class, with members containing two distinct domains. Using AlphaFold2, we predicted the full SIX effector repertoire of Fol and show that SIX6 and SIX13 are also FOLD effectors, which we validated experimentally for SIX6. Based on structural prediction and comparisons, we show that FOLD effectors are present within three divisions of fungi and are expanded in pathogens and symbionts. Further structural comparisons demonstrate that Fol secretes effectors that adopt a limited number of structural folds during infection of tomato. This analysis also revealed a structural relationship between transcriptionally co-regulated effector pairs. We make use of the Avr1 structure to understand its recognition by the I receptor, which leads to disease resistance in tomato. This study represents an important advance in our understanding of Fol-tomato, and by extension plant–fungal interactions, which will assist in the development of novel control and engineering strategies to combat plant pathogens.