Calcium signaling in plant-microbe interaction: Difference between revisions

From MicrobeWiki, the student-edited microbiology resource
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 17: Line 17:
==Decoding of Ca<sup>2+</sup> Signature==
==Decoding of Ca<sup>2+</sup> Signature==
As [Ca<sup>2+</sup>]<sub>cyt</sub> change, the Ca<sup>2+</sup> signature is decoded by Ca<sup>2+</sup> sensor proteins.<ref name=" a "></ref> There are various types of sensor proteins in plants that can bind to Ca<sup>2+</sup> ions, and they respond to the rise in [Ca<sup>2+</sup>]<sub>cyt</sub> in two different ways. The first possible type are Calmodulin (CaM) and CaM-like proteins (CMLs). Binding to Ca<sup>2+</sup> changes their structures and enable them to bind to their targets, calcineurin b-like proteins (CBLs). CBLs then interact with CBL-interacting protein kinases (CIPKs), enzymes that are capable of phosphorylation.<ref name=" c ">[https://nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/nph.13031?src=getftr Seybold, Heike et al. “Ca<sup>2+</sup> signalling in plant immune response: from pattern recognition receptors to Ca<sup>2+</sup> decoding mechanisms” 2014. New Phytologist 204:782-790.]</ref> The second possible way a sensor can decode the Ca<sup>2+</sup> signature is that the sensor has a kinase domain of its own and can phosphorylate other molecules directly. An example of this type of sensor is Ca<sup>2+</sup>-dependent protein kinases (CDPKs or CPKs).<ref name=" c "></ref><br><br>
As [Ca<sup>2+</sup>]<sub>cyt</sub> change, the Ca<sup>2+</sup> signature is decoded by Ca<sup>2+</sup> sensor proteins.<ref name=" a "></ref> There are various types of sensor proteins in plants that can bind to Ca<sup>2+</sup> ions, and they respond to the rise in [Ca<sup>2+</sup>]<sub>cyt</sub> in two different ways. The first possible type are Calmodulin (CaM) and CaM-like proteins (CMLs). Binding to Ca<sup>2+</sup> changes their structures and enable them to bind to their targets, calcineurin b-like proteins (CBLs). CBLs then interact with CBL-interacting protein kinases (CIPKs), enzymes that are capable of phosphorylation.<ref name=" c ">[https://nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/nph.13031?src=getftr Seybold, Heike et al. “Ca<sup>2+</sup> signalling in plant immune response: from pattern recognition receptors to Ca<sup>2+</sup> decoding mechanisms” 2014. New Phytologist 204:782-790.]</ref> The second possible way a sensor can decode the Ca<sup>2+</sup> signature is that the sensor has a kinase domain of its own and can phosphorylate other molecules directly. An example of this type of sensor is Ca<sup>2+</sup>-dependent protein kinases (CDPKs or CPKs).<ref name=" c "></ref><br><br>
This can cause changes at both transcriptional and post-translational level. At post-translational level, the phosphorylation events by CIPKs or CPKs activate RBOHD in the cell membrane and lead to a further increase in the level of ROS production.<ref name=" a "></ref> The ROS then further promotes the influx of Ca<sup>2+</sup>, forming a positive-feedback loop.<ref>[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0021925820588972 Oda, Takashi et al. “Structure of the N-terminal Regulatory Domain of a Plant NADPH Oxidase and Its Functional Implications” 2010. Journal of Biological Chemistry 285(2):1435-1445.]</ref> CCaMK, a sensor protein involved in decoding the Ca<sup>2+</sup> signal at post-translational level, is involved in plant’s response to symbiotic signal. It is found in a complex that activates a transcription factor called RAM1, which regulates arbuscular branching, a process in the symbiosis of plant with arbuscular mycorrhizae.<ref name=" a "></ref> At transcriptional level, Ca<sup>2+</sup>-modified CaM can bind to transcription factors that promote the transcription of gene related to plant immunity, for example, the gene for synthesis of salicylic acid in plants, causing the whole plant to be ready for pathogen attack.<ref>[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167488913000463#bb0255 Cheval, C. et al. “Calcium/calmodulin-mediated regulation of plant immunity” 2013. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Molecular Cell Research 1833(7):1766-1771.]</ref> However, more research is needed to understand how the transcription factors lead to plants’ defense against pathogens. <br><br>





Revision as of 23:03, 5 December 2021

Introduction

Calcium ion (Ca2+) is an important second messenger involved in many signaling pathways in plants.[1] The concentration of free Ca2+ in the cytosol in a plant cell ([Ca2+]cyt) connects the extracellular stimuli, including the signal of microbes, to intracellular responses. Since Ca2+ is neither synthesized nor degraded by plants, [Ca2+]cyt is completely dependent on the entry of external source or release of Ca2+ from its intracellular stores.[2][3] However, because Ca2+ can react with phosphate, the energy source of life, its presence in the cytoplasm will prevent energy metabolism and other cellular activities from taking place.[4] Thus, its concentration is regulated tightly by various proteins. In plant-microbe interaction, different microbes trigger different receptor proteins, causing distinctive Ca2+ elevation patterns, referred to as Ca2+ signature. Ca2+ signature can be different from each other in various aspects: amplitude, duration, frequency, spatial distribution, and times of cycle in [Ca2+]cyt changes. The Ca2+ signature produced by microbe signal can be decoded by downstream effectors, changing the expression of defense or symbiosis-related genes, resulting in different responses by plants.[5]

Detection of Microbes

The first step of a Ca2+ signaling event is the detection of microbes performed by pattern-recognition receptors (PRRs), a type of receptor protein located on the plasma membrane of a plant cell. PRRs are capable of recognizing microbe-associated molecular patterns (MAMPs), molecules specific to certain classes of microbes that are present in extracellular space.[6]

Bacteria

All PRRs that can recognize MAMPs of bacteria studied so far are either receptor-like kinase or receptor-like protein. All of them are transmembrane receptors.[7] One example of these PRRs is flagellin-sensitive 2 (FLS2), which recognizes the flagellin protein in bacteria flagellum.[8] MAMPs of symbiotic bacteria can also be recognized by PPRs. A lysin-motif (LysM) receptor-like kinase, nodulation (nod) factor perception (NFP), can recognize lipochitooligosaccharide in the nod factor released by symbiotic bacteria such as rhizobia.[9]

Fungi

An example of PRRs capable of recognizing fungi is the LysM-receptor kinase 5 and chitin elicitor receptor kinase 1 receptor complex, which recognizes chitin in the cell wall of fungi.[10] Lysin-motif (LysM) receptor-like kinases also recognize myc factors released by symbiotic fungi such as mycorrhizal fungi.[11]

Formation of Ca2+ Signature

After a PRR detect microbes, it triggers an influx of Ca2+ ion from outside the cell, resulting in a unique Ca2+ signature.[12] The activated PRRs have two mechanisms: it can either trigger the entry of Ca2+ by itself or by activating a downstream receptor. For the first type of mechanism, there are two possibilities. The first possibility is that it can form a complex with the Ca2+ ion channels on the membrane physically and regulate the activity of the channels. The second possibility is to produce a signaling molecule by itself to bind to Ca2+ permeable channels or Ca2+ pumps and activate them. The other mechanism is to activate a downstream receptor-like cytoplasmic kinase (RLCK).[5] Many of the PRRs activate BIK1, a RLCK which activate a NADPH oxidase called RBOHD by phosphorylating it. Activated RBOHD produce reactive oxygen species (ROS) such as H2O2, and the ROS interact with Ca2+ channels and cause an influx of extracellular Ca2+, although the precise mechanism is not known.[13] The increase in [Ca2+]cyt can then trigger the release of Ca2+ from internal sources, further increasing [Ca2+]cyt.[5]

When PRR detects the presence of nod factors or myc factors, Ca2+ signaling in both cytoplasm and nucleus can happen.[14] The influx of Ca2+ into nucleus is mediated by both Ca2+ channeling proteins and ATP-powered Ca2+ pump located on the nucleus membrane, and the influx of Ca2+ into cytoplasm is likely to be caused by the interaction of ROS with channel proteins.[14][15]

Decoding of Ca2+ Signature

As [Ca2+]cyt change, the Ca2+ signature is decoded by Ca2+ sensor proteins.[5] There are various types of sensor proteins in plants that can bind to Ca2+ ions, and they respond to the rise in [Ca2+]cyt in two different ways. The first possible type are Calmodulin (CaM) and CaM-like proteins (CMLs). Binding to Ca2+ changes their structures and enable them to bind to their targets, calcineurin b-like proteins (CBLs). CBLs then interact with CBL-interacting protein kinases (CIPKs), enzymes that are capable of phosphorylation.[16] The second possible way a sensor can decode the Ca2+ signature is that the sensor has a kinase domain of its own and can phosphorylate other molecules directly. An example of this type of sensor is Ca2+-dependent protein kinases (CDPKs or CPKs).[16]

This can cause changes at both transcriptional and post-translational level. At post-translational level, the phosphorylation events by CIPKs or CPKs activate RBOHD in the cell membrane and lead to a further increase in the level of ROS production.[5] The ROS then further promotes the influx of Ca2+, forming a positive-feedback loop.[17] CCaMK, a sensor protein involved in decoding the Ca2+ signal at post-translational level, is involved in plant’s response to symbiotic signal. It is found in a complex that activates a transcription factor called RAM1, which regulates arbuscular branching, a process in the symbiosis of plant with arbuscular mycorrhizae.[5] At transcriptional level, Ca2+-modified CaM can bind to transcription factors that promote the transcription of gene related to plant immunity, for example, the gene for synthesis of salicylic acid in plants, causing the whole plant to be ready for pathogen attack.[18] However, more research is needed to understand how the transcription factors lead to plants’ defense against pathogens.


Conclusion


References

  1. Sanders Dale et al. “Calcium at the Crossroads of Signaling” 2002. The Plant Cell 14:401–S417.
  2. Vadassery, J. and Oelmüller, R. “Calcium signaling in pathogenic and beneficial plant microbe interactions” 2009. Plant Signaling & Behavior 4:1024-1027.
  3. Edel, Kai H. et al. “The Evolution of Calcium-Based Signalling in Plants” 2017. Current Biology 27(13):R667-R679.
  4. Carafoli, E. and Krebs, J. “Why calcium? How calcium became the best communicator” 2016. Journal of Biological Chemistry 291(40):20849–57.
  5. 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 Yuan et al. “Calcium signatures and signaling events orchestrate plant–microbe interactions” 2017. Current Opinion in Plant Biology 38:173-183.
  6. Lu, You and Tsuda, Kenichi. “Intimate Association of PRR- and NLR-Mediated Signaling in Plant Immunity” 2020. Molecular Plant-Microbe Interactions 34(1):3-14.
  7. Segonzac, Cécile and Zipfel, Cyril. “Activation of plant pattern-recognition receptors by bacteria” 2011. Current Opinion in Microbiology 14(1): 54-61.
  8. Chinchilla, D. et al. “A flagellin-induced complex of the receptor FLS2 and BAK1 initiates plant defence” 2007. Nature 448: 497-500.
  9. Gough, Clare and Jacquet, Christophe. “Nod factor perception protein carries weight in biotic interactions” 2013. Trends in Plant Science 18(10): 566-574.
  10. Liu, T. et al. “Chitin-Induced Dimerization Activates a Plant Immune Receptor” 2012. Science 336(6085): 1160-1164.
  11. Gust, Andrea A. et al. “Plant LysM proteins: modules mediating symbiosis and immunity” 2012. Trends in Plant Science 17(8): 495-502.
  12. Keinath, Nana F. et al. “Live Cell Imaging with R-GECO1 Sheds Light on flg22- and Chitin-Induced Transient [Ca2+cyt Patterns in Arabidopsis” 2015. Molecular Plant 8(8):1188-1200.]
  13. Li, Lei et al. “The FLS2-Associated Kinase BIK1 Directly Phosphorylates the NADPH Oxidase RbohD to Control Plant Immunity” 2014. Cell Host & Microbe 15(3):329-338.
  14. 14.0 14.1 Oldroyd, Giles E. D. “Speak, friend, and enter: signalling systems that promote beneficial symbiotic associations in plants” 2013. Nature Reviews Microbiology 11:252-263.
  15. Cardenas, Luis et al. “Fast, transient and specific intracellular ROS changes in living root hair cells responding to Nod factors (NFs)” 2008. The Plant Journal 56:802-813.
  16. 16.0 16.1 Seybold, Heike et al. “Ca2+ signalling in plant immune response: from pattern recognition receptors to Ca2+ decoding mechanisms” 2014. New Phytologist 204:782-790.
  17. Oda, Takashi et al. “Structure of the N-terminal Regulatory Domain of a Plant NADPH Oxidase and Its Functional Implications” 2010. Journal of Biological Chemistry 285(2):1435-1445.
  18. Cheval, C. et al. “Calcium/calmodulin-mediated regulation of plant immunity” 2013. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Molecular Cell Research 1833(7):1766-1771.


Edited by Yueqi Song, student of Joan Slonczewski for BIOL 116 Information in Living Systems, 2021, Kenyon College.