Molecular determinants of resistance activation and suppression by Phytophthora infestans effector IPI-O - PubMed
Molecular determinants of resistance activation and suppression by Phytophthora infestans effector IPI-O
Yu Chen et al. PLoS Pathog. 2012.
Erratum in
- PLoS Pathog. 2012 Sep;8(9). doi:10.1371/annotation/75775518-f06e-4148-a639-31cfc6972b2e
Abstract
Despite intensive breeding efforts, potato late blight, caused by the oomycete pathogen Phytophthora infestans, remains a threat to potato production worldwide because newly evolved pathogen strains have consistently overcome major resistance genes. The potato RB gene, derived from the wild species Solanum bulbocastanum, confers resistance to most P. infestans strains through recognition of members of the pathogen effector family IPI-O. While the majority of IPI-O proteins are recognized by RB to elicit resistance (e.g. IPI-O1, IPI-O2), some family members are able to elude detection (e.g. IPI-O4). In addition, IPI-O4 blocks recognition of IPI-O1, leading to inactivation of RB-mediated programmed cell death. Here, we report results that elucidate molecular mechanisms governing resistance elicitation or suppression of RB by IPI-O. Our data indicate self-association of the RB coiled coil (CC) domain as well as a physical interaction between this domain and the effectors IPI-O4 and IPI-O1. We identified four amino acids within IPI-O that are critical for interaction with the RB CC domain and one of these amino acids, at position 129, determines hypersensitive response (HR) elicitation in planta. IPI-O1 mutant L129P fails to induce HR in presence of RB while IPI-O4 P129L gains the ability to induce an HR. Like IPI-O4, IPI-O1 L129P is also able to suppress the HR mediated by RB, indicating a critical step in the evolution of this gene family. Our results point to a model in which IPI-O effectors can affect RB function through interaction with the RB CC domain.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Figures

A) Yeast two-hybrid interactions between domains of RB or domain self-association; B) Interactions between domains of RB and IPI-O1 or IPI-O4; C) Results of co-immunoprecipitation of RB CC domain with IPI-O fusion proteins. The indicated protein combinations were expressed in N. benthamiana leaves and total proteins were incubated with green fluorescent protein (GFP) antibody and agarose beads. Precipitated proteins were detected using Myc-tag antibody. Proteins with no fusion or with a hemagglutinin (HA) tag were used as negative controls.

The three-letter abbreviation for each species is shown. Numbers after the species name represents the PCR clone number. + and − signs to the right of the yeast colonies indicate positive or negative interaction, respectively. Photos were taken after 8 days of growth on selective media. Photos represent the results of three independent yeast transformations.

+ and − signs to the right of the yeast colonies indicate positive or negative interaction, respectively. Pictures were taken after 8 days of growth on selective media. All the experiments were performed three times.

A. tumefaciens strains expressing IPI-O, IPI-O mutants, or the indicated controls were infiltrated into leaves of RB transgenic N. benthamiana plants. Leaves were photographed at 6 days after infiltration.

A. tumefaciens strains expressing the indicated IPI-O variants or a GFP control were infiltrated or co-infiltrated into leaves of RB transgenic N. benthamiana plants. Leaves were photographed at 6 days after infiltration.

The top panel represents a resistance response. In the absence of IPI-O1, RB remains in a resting state. The presence of IPI-O1 elicits a conformational change that enables RB oligomerization through the CC domain and leads to an activated protein state. As shown in the bottom panel, when IPI-O4 is present, this effector interacts with the CC domain and prevents CC oligomerization, thus suppressing RB activation.
Similar articles
-
Phytophthora infestans Effectors IPI-O1 and IPI-O4 Each Contribute to Pathogen Virulence.
Chen Y, Halterman DA. Chen Y, et al. Phytopathology. 2017 May;107(5):600-606. doi: 10.1094/PHYTO-06-16-0240-R. Epub 2017 Mar 28. Phytopathology. 2017. PMID: 28350531
-
Halterman DA, Chen Y, Sopee J, Berduo-Sandoval J, Sánchez-Pérez A. Halterman DA, et al. PLoS One. 2010 May 7;5(5):e10536. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0010536. PLoS One. 2010. PMID: 20479869 Free PMC article.
-
Zhao J, Song J. Zhao J, et al. Plant Commun. 2021 Aug 25;2(6):100236. doi: 10.1016/j.xplc.2021.100236. eCollection 2021 Nov 8. Plant Commun. 2021. PMID: 34778749 Free PMC article.
-
Late blight resistance genes in potato breeding.
Paluchowska P, Śliwka J, Yin Z. Paluchowska P, et al. Planta. 2022 May 16;255(6):127. doi: 10.1007/s00425-022-03910-6. Planta. 2022. PMID: 35576021 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Understanding and exploiting late blight resistance in the age of effectors.
Vleeshouwers VG, Raffaele S, Vossen JH, Champouret N, Oliva R, Segretin ME, Rietman H, Cano LM, Lokossou A, Kessel G, Pel MA, Kamoun S. Vleeshouwers VG, et al. Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2011;49:507-31. doi: 10.1146/annurev-phyto-072910-095326. Annu Rev Phytopathol. 2011. PMID: 21663437 Review.
Cited by
-
Cesari S, Thilliez G, Ribot C, Chalvon V, Michel C, Jauneau A, Rivas S, Alaux L, Kanzaki H, Okuyama Y, Morel JB, Fournier E, Tharreau D, Terauchi R, Kroj T. Cesari S, et al. Plant Cell. 2013 Apr;25(4):1463-81. doi: 10.1105/tpc.112.107201. Epub 2013 Apr 2. Plant Cell. 2013. PMID: 23548743 Free PMC article.
-
Cytosolic activation of cell death and stem rust resistance by cereal MLA-family CC-NLR proteins.
Cesari S, Moore J, Chen C, Webb D, Periyannan S, Mago R, Bernoux M, Lagudah ES, Dodds PN. Cesari S, et al. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016 Sep 6;113(36):10204-9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1605483113. Epub 2016 Aug 23. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016. PMID: 27555587 Free PMC article.
-
Oh S, Kim S, Park HJ, Kim MS, Seo MK, Wu CH, Lee HA, Kim HS, Kamoun S, Choi D. Oh S, et al. Plant Biotechnol J. 2023 Jul;21(7):1361-1372. doi: 10.1111/pbi.14039. Epub 2023 Mar 13. Plant Biotechnol J. 2023. PMID: 36912620 Free PMC article.
-
Lazar N, Mesarich CH, Petit-Houdenot Y, Talbi N, Li de la Sierra-Gallay I, Zélie E, Blondeau K, Gracy J, Ollivier B, Blaise F, Rouxel T, Balesdent MH, Idnurm A, van Tilbeurgh H, Fudal I. Lazar N, et al. PLoS Pathog. 2022 Jul 6;18(7):e1010664. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1010664. eCollection 2022 Jul. PLoS Pathog. 2022. PMID: 35793393 Free PMC article.
-
Effectors of Phytophthora pathogens are powerful weapons for manipulating host immunity.
Wang W, Jiao F. Wang W, et al. Planta. 2019 Aug;250(2):413-425. doi: 10.1007/s00425-019-03219-x. Epub 2019 Jun 26. Planta. 2019. PMID: 31243548 Review.
References
-
- Dangl JL, Jones JD. Plant pathogens and integrated defence responses to infection. Nature. 2001;411:826–833. - PubMed
-
- Bent AF, Mackey D. Elicitors, effectors, and R genes: The new paradigm and a lifetime supply of questions. Ann Rev Phytopathol. 2007;45:399–436. - PubMed
-
- Chisholm ST, Coaker G, Day B, Staskawicz BJ. Host-microbe interactions: shaping the evolution of the plant immune response. Cell. 2006;124:803–814. - PubMed
-
- He P, Shan L, Lin N-C, Martin GB, Kemmerling B, et al. Specific bacterial suppressors of MAMP signaling upstream of MAPKKK in Arabidopsis innate immunity. Cell. 2006;125:563–575. - PubMed
-
- Nomura K, DebRoy S, Lee YH, Pumplin N, Jones J, et al. A bacterial virulence protein suppresses host innate immunity to cause plant disease. Science. 2006;313:220–223. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources