Search

Plants deploy cell-surface and intracellular leucine rich-repeat domain (LRR) immune receptors to detect pathogens 1 . LRR receptor kinases and LRR receptor proteins at the plasma membrane recognize microorganism-derived molecules to elicit pattern-triggered immunity (PTI), whereas nucleotide-binding LRR proteins detect microbial effectors inside cells to confer effector-triggered immunity (ETI). Although PTI and ETI are initiated in different host cell compartments, they rely on the transcriptional activation of similar sets of genes 2 , suggesting pathway convergence upstream of nuclear events. Here we report that PTI triggered by the Arabidopsis LRR receptor protein RLP23 requires signalling-competent dimers of the lipase-like proteins EDS1 and PAD4, and of ADR1 family helper nucleotide-binding LRRs, which are all components of ETI. The cell-surface LRR receptor kinase SOBIR1 links RLP23 with EDS1, PAD4 and ADR1 proteins, suggesting the formation of supramolecular complexes containing PTI receptors and transducers at the inner side of the plasma membrane. We detected similar evolutionary patterns in LRR receptor protein and nucleotide-binding LRR genes across Arabidopsis accessions; overall higher levels of variation in LRR receptor proteins than in LRR receptor kinases are consistent with distinct roles of these two receptor families in plant immunity. We propose that the EDS1-PAD4-ADR1 node is a convergence point for defence signalling cascades, activated by both surface-resident and intracellular LRR receptors, in conferring pathogen immunity., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

Plants have evolved effective strategies to defend themselves against pathogen invasion. Starting from the plasma membrane with the recognition of microbe-associated molecular patterns (MAMPs) via pattern recognition receptors, internal cellular signaling pathways are induced to ultimately fend off the attack. Phospholipase D (PLD) hydrolyzes membrane phospholipids to produce phosphatidic acid (PA), which has been proposed to play a second messenger role in immunity. The Arabidopsis ( Arabidopsis thaliana ) PLD family consists of 12 members, and for some of these, a specific function in resistance toward a subset of pathogens has been shown. We demonstrate here that Arabidopsis PLDγ1, but not its close homologs PLDγ2 and PLDγ3, is specifically involved in plant immunity. Genetic inactivation of PLDγ1 resulted in increased resistance toward the virulent bacterium Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato DC3000 and the necrotrophic fungus Botrytis cinerea As pldγ1 mutant plants responded with elevated levels of reactive oxygen species to MAMP treatment, a negative regulatory function for this PLD isoform is proposed. Importantly, PA levels in pldγ1 mutants were not affected compared to stressed wild-type plants, suggesting that alterations in PA levels are not likely the cause for the enhanced immunity in the pldγ1 line. Instead, the plasma-membrane-attached PLDγ1 protein colocalized and associated with the BAK1-INTERACTING RECEPTOR-LIKE KINASES BIR2 and BIR3, which are known negative regulators of pattern-triggered immunity. Moreover, complex formation of PLDγ1 and BIR2 was further promoted upon MAMP treatment. Hence, we propose that PLDγ1 acts as a negative regulator of plant immune responses in complex with immunity-related proteins BIR2 and BIR3., (© 2020 American Society of Plant Biologists. All Rights Reserved.)

Summary: Pattern recognition receptors (PRRs) sense microbial patterns and activate innate immunity against attempted microbial invasions. The leucine‐rich repeat receptor kinases (LRR‐RK) FLS2 and EFR, and the LRR receptor protein (LRR‐RP) receptors RLP23 and RLP42, respectively, represent prototypical members of these two prominent and closely related PRR families.We conducted a survey of Arabidopsis thaliana immune signaling mediated by these receptors to address the question of commonalities and differences between LRR‐RK and LRR‐RP signaling.Quantitative differences in timing and amplitude were observed for several early immune responses, with RP‐mediated responses typically being slower and more prolonged than those mediated by RKs. Activation of RLP23, but not FLS2, induced the production of camalexin. Transcriptomic analysis revealed that RLP23‐regulated genes represent only a fraction of those genes differentially expressed upon FLS2 activation. Several positive and negative regulators of FLS2‐signaling play similar roles in RLP23 signaling. Intriguingly, the cytoplasmic receptor kinase BIK1, a positive regulator of RK signaling, acts as a negative regulator of RP‐type immune receptors in a manner dependent on BIK1 kinase activity.Our study unveiled unexpected differences in two closely related receptor systems and reports a new negative role of BIK1 in plant immunity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]