RESEARCH ARTICLE
SPIKE1 Activates the GTPase ROP6 to Guide the Polarized Growth of Infection Threads in Lotus japonicus
Jing Liua,b, Miao Xia Liua, Li Ping Qiua and Fang Xiea,*
a National Key Laboratory of Plant Molecular Genetics, CAS Center for Excellence in Molecular Plant Sciences, Shanghai Institute of Plant Physiology and Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai 200032, China b University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China * Correspondence Author: [email protected]
Short title: SPK1-ROP6 mediate polarized growth of ITs
One-sentence summary: SPIKE1, a DOCK family guanine nucleotide exchange factor, interacts with and activates the GTPase LjROP6 to mediate the polar progression of infection threads in Lotus japonicus.
The author responsible for distribution of materials integral to the findings presented in this article in accordance with the policy described in the Instructions for Authors (www.plantcell.org) is: Fang Xie ([email protected]).
ABSTRACT In legumes, rhizobia attach to root hair tips and secrete nodulation factor to activate rhizobial infection and nodule organogenesis. Endosymbiotic rhizobia enter nodule primordia via a specialized transcellular compartment known as the infection thread (IT). The IT elongates by polar tip growth, following the path of the migrating nucleus along and within the root hair cell. Rho-family ROP GTPases are known to regulate the polarized growth of cells, but their role in regulating polarized IT growth is poorly understood. Here we show that LjSPK1, a DOCK family guanine nucleotide exchange factor (GEF), interacts with three type I ROP GTPases. Genetic analyses showed that these three ROP GTPases are involved in root hair development, but only LjROP6 is required for IT formation after rhizobia inoculation. Misdirected ITs formed in the root hairs of Ljspk1 and Ljrop6 mutants. We show that LjSPK1 functions as a GEF that activates LjROP6. LjROP6 enhanced the plasma membrane localization LjSPK1 in Nicotiana benthamiana leaf cells and Lotus japonicus root hairs, and LjSPK1 and LjROP6 interact at the plasma membrane. Taken together, these results shed light on how the LjROP6-LjSPK1 module mediates the polarized growth of ITs in L. japonicus.
INTRODUCTION 1
To form symbiotic root nodules, legumes and rhizobia initiate their symbiotic 2
interaction via a molecular dialog. The host legume secretes flavonoid compounds 3
that function as signals sensed by rhizosphere rhizobia, and the expression of 4
nodulation (Nod) genes is induced for the biosynthesis and secretion of Nodulation 5
Factors (NF). NFs are lipochito-oligosaccharide molecular signals that are perceived 6
Plant Cell Advance Publication. Published on October 6, 2020, doi:10.1105/tpc.20.00109
©2020 American Society of Plant Biologists. All Rights Reserved
by NF receptors. NFs initiate a series of plant signaling and developmental events, 7
including root hair deformation, membrane depolarization, intracellular calcium 8
oscillations, and cortex cell division. These events lead to the formation of the nodule 9
primordium (Ehrhardt et al., 1992; Downie and Walker, 1999; Timmers et al., 1999; 10
Cullimore et al., 2001; Esseling et al., 2003; Oldroyd and Downie, 2008). 11
In temperate legumes such as Lotus japonicus and Medicago truncatula, rhizobia 12
attach to the host’s root hairs tips and redirect root hair growth to entrap the rhizobia 13
within an infection chamber (Esseling et al., 2003; Murray, 2011; Fournier et al., 14
2015). Within the root hair chamber, an infection pocket filled with bacteria forms 15
from a tubular invagination of the cell wall and membrane; this structure is known as 16
an infection thread (IT). The IT extends from the infection chamber down through the 17
root hairs to the root cortex, where a nodule primordium is produced (Fournier et al., 18
2008; Fournier et al., 2015). The bacteria grow, divide, and fill the IT. The bacteria 19
are then released from the IT into the nodule primordium via an unwalled droplet 20
(Brewin, 2004). This leads to the formation of a nitrogen-fixing root nodule that 21
provides the proper microenvironment for nitrogen fixation by rhizobia and nutrient 22
exchange between the two partners (Jones et al., 2007; Oldroyd, 2013; Roy et al., 23
2020). 24
Genetic studies of L. japonicus and M. truncatula have revealed several genes 25
that are required for IT formation, including LjNAP/MtRIT1, LjPIR, LjSCARN, and 26
LjARPC1. These genes encode components of the WAVE/SCAR-ARP2/3 complex, 27
which is required for actin nucleation and cytoskeletal rearrangement. LjNPL/MtNPL 28
encode a legume-specific pectate lyase involved in cell wall remodeling. Mutant 29
analyses revealed some genes that are required for rhizobial infection, but their 30
precise biological/biochemical functions are unknown. These genes include 31
LjRINRK1, encoding an atypical leucine-rich repeat receptor-like kinase; 32
LjCERBERUS/MtLIN, encoding a U-box and WD40-repeat domain protein; 33
MtVAPYRIN, encoding a VAP/MSP and ankyrin-repeats domain protein; MtRPG, 34
encoding a coiled-coil protein; and MtCBS1, encoding a DUF21 and 35
cystathionine-β-synthase domain protein (Yokota et al., 2009; Miyahara et al., 2010; 36
Hossain et al., 2012; Qiu et al., 2015; Xie et al., 2012; Liu et al., 2019a; Li et al., 2019; 37
Kiss et al., 2009; Yano et al., 2009; Murray et al., 2011; Arrighi et al., 2008, Sinharoy 38
et al., 2016). 39
The IT initiates and extends from the root hair tip to the nodule primordium. This 40
process is directional, indicating that ITs show polarized growth. The polarized 41
growth of pollen tubes and root hairs requires a strong calcium gradient at the tip, a 42
polarized actin cytoskeleton, tip-directed vesicle trafficking, exocytosis, and signaling 43
by ROP (Rho of plants) GTPases (Samaj et al., 2006; Kost, 2008; Craddock and Yang, 44
2012; Craddock et al., 2012). The LIN-VAPYRIN-Exo70H4 protein complex in M. 45
truncatula localizes to the tips of elongated pre-ITs, suggesting that an exocytosis 46
process may be involved in the polarized growth of ITs (Liu et al., 2019b). Type I 47
ROP GTPases (including ROP1 to ROP8) play important roles in root hair and pollen 48
tube tip growth in Arabidopsis thaliana (Li et al., 1999; Kost et al., 1999; Jones et al., 49
2002; Eklund et al., 2010; Craddock et al., 2012). The constitutively active (CA) 50
forms of AtROP4 and AtROP6 do not function in the polarized growth of root hairs, 51
nor do they form a localized Ca2+ gradient at the root hair tip (Molendijk et al., 2001). 52
Compared to the wild type, plants expressing CA AtROP2 produce additional and 53
misplaced root hairs on the cell surface as well as longer root hairs, whereas plants 54
expressing dominant negative (DN) forms of AtROP2 produce shortened wavy root 55
hair (Jones et al., 2002). 56
MtROP10 is associated with the NF receptor MtNFP and is involved in 57
regulating the polarized growth of root hairs and NF-induced root hair deformation in 58
M. truncatula (Lei et al., 2015). The roles of ROP genes in M. truncatula have been 59
clarified to some extent by knock-down RNA interference (RNAi) studies. Compared 60
to the wild type, MtROP8 RNAi transgenic plants show larger numbers of infection 61
events and increased nodulation in response to inoculation, and MtROP9 RNAi plants 62
show enhanced mycorrhizal and early hyphal root colonization but reduced rhizobial 63
infection (Wang et al., 2014, Kiirika et al., 2012). In L. japonicus, the Nod factor 64
receptor LjNFR5 interacts with LjROP6 to regulate IT formation and nodulation (Ke 65
et al., 2012), and LjROP6 interacts with LjCHC1, a central component in 66
clathrin-mediated endocytosis, to regulate rhizobial infection and nodule formation 67
(Wang et al., 2015). These findings demonstrate that LjROP6 plays an essential role 68
in regulating legume–rhizobium symbiosis. However, it is unknown whether ROP 69
GTPase function in the polarized growth of ITs. 70
ROP GTPases act as molecular switches in various signaling pathways by 71
cycling between the GTP-bound active and GDP-bound inactive forms (Yang, 2002). 72
The shuttling between the active and inactive forms of ROP GTPases is regulated by 73
three types of factors: RhoGEF (guanine nucleotide exchange factor), which controls 74
the transition of these GTPase from the inactive (GDP-bound) to active (GTP-bound) 75
form; RhoGAP (GTPase-activating protein), which accelerates GTP hydrolysis; and 76
RhoGDI (guanine nucleotide dissociation inhibitor), which inhibits GDP release so 77
that ROP GTPases remain in their inactive state (Yang, 2002; Kost, 2008). The M. 78
truncatula genome contains 10 genes encoding PRONE-type (plant Rop nucleotide 79
exchanger) RopGEFs. MtRopGEF2 affects the cytosolic Ca2+ gradient and the 80
subcellular architecture of root hairs and is required for root hair development (Riely 81
et al., 2011). 82
In addition to PRONE-type RopGEFs, a single DOCK family GEF, SPIKE1 83
(SPK1), is also present in plants. In A. thaliana, spk1 seedlings show a lethal 84
phenotype and display serious defects in the polarized growth of cotyledons and leaf 85
epidermal cells (Qiu et al., 2002). The AtSPK1 DHR2 domain binds to ROPs to 86
facilitate nucleotide exchange and generates signals to activate two heteromeric 87
complexes, WAVE/SCAR and ARP2/3, to control actin polymerization (Basu et al., 88
2008). AtSPK1 is involved in activating the AtROP6–AtRIC1 pathway, which 89
regulates the auxin-mediated internalization of AtPIN2 (Lin et al., 2012). In rice 90
(Oryza sativa), OsSPK1 interacts with OsPit, an R protein against rice blast fungus, 91
and regulates the activation of OsRac1 to trigger the immune response (Wang et al., 92
2018). 93
Although ITs show polar growth, it is unknown whether a ROP GTPase 94
regulates this process and if so, how this ROP GTPase is activated. Here we show that 95
LjSPK1 interacts with LjROP6 and activates its ROP GTPase activity. Some ITs were 96
found to be misdirected in the root hairs of the Ljspk1 and Ljrop6 mutants after 97
rhizobial infection. Our results suggest that an LjROP6-LjSPK1 signaling module 98
guides the direction of IT growth during the early stage of rhizobial infection in L. 99
japonicus. 100
101
RESULTS 102
Expression Pattern of SPK1 in L. japonicus 103
SPK1 is a DOCK family GEF that activates ROP GTPases (Basu et al., 2008). Using 104
BLAST tools, we searched for the SPK1 gene in the L. japonicus genome. This search 105
identified LjSPK1 (LotjaGi3g1v0299000), which encodes an 1829-amino acid protein 106
showing 79.2% identity with AtSPK1. Phylogenetic analysis revealed that SPK1 is 107
conserved across eukaryotes, usually as a single copy gene, with one exception being 108
soybean (Glycine max), which has undergone a recent whole-genome duplication 109
(Schmutz et al., 2010) (Supplemental Figure 1A). Sequence analyses revealed three 110
conserved domains in LjSPK1: DHR1 (amino acids 446–726); DHR2 (amino acids 111
1299–1829), which is the GEF catalytic domain; and DHR3 (amino acids 140–287) 112
(Supplemental Figure 1B). To investigate the transcriptional pattern of LjSPK1 during 113
nodulation, we monitored the transcript levels of LjSPK1 after NF treatment by 114
RT-qPCR. LjSPK1 transcript levels slightly increased at 6 and 12 h after NF 115
inoculation vs. the 0 h control (Figure 1A). 116
We analyzed the spatial expression pattern of LjSPK1 by monitoring GUS 117
expression from the GUS gene driven by the LjSPK1 promoter (pLjSPK1:GUS) in L. 118
japonicus transgenic hairy roots. In the absence of rhizobial inoculation, we detected 119
GUS signals in root vascular tissues and lateral roots (Figure 1B and C). However, 120
after inoculation with Mesorhizobium loti R7A/lacZ, GUS signals were present in the 121
dividing cortex region (Figure 1D), nodule primordia (Figure 1E), bumps (Figure 1F), 122
young nodules (Figure 1G), and vascular bundles of mature nodules (Figure 1H). 123
Light microscopy analyses of sections of these nodules revealed GUS signals in bump 124
and young nodule cells (Figure 1I and J), but not in the nitrogen-fixation zone of 125
mature nodules (Figure 1K). These expression patterns suggest that LjSPK1 might be 126
involved in root nodule symbiosis in L. japonicus. 127
128
LjSPK1 Is Required for Polarized Growth in Plants and Rhizobial Infection 129
To explore the roles of LjSPK1 in root nodule symbiosis, we obtained two LORE1 130
insertion lines (30019873 and 30051253) in which LjSPK1 had insertions at amino 131
acid positions 273 and 910 from the start codon, respectively. These lines were 132
designated as Ljspk1-1 (30019873) and Ljspk1-2 (30051253) (Supplemental Figure 133
1B). RT-qPCR analysis revealed that endogenous LjSPK1 transcript levels were 134
significantly reduced in both Ljspk1 lines (Supplemental Figure 1C). For both Ljspk1 135
alleles, the homozygotes were nearly completely sterile, so we could only use 136
seedlings obtained from the segregation of heterozygous plants for phenotypic 137
analyses. Soil-grown Ljspk1 mutants survived but showed some growth defects, 138
including severe dwarfism of adult plants (Supplemental Figure 1D), few and smaller 139
flowers with an abnormal petal shape (Supplemental Figure 1E), and smaller, 140
dark-green leaves (Supplemental Figure 1F–H). Wild-type plants formed elongated, 141
filamentous trichomes on the abaxial midribs of leaves, whereas the Ljspk1 mutants 142
formed fewer and smaller trichomes (Supplemental Figure 1H). Scanning electron 143
microscopy of epidermal cells on the dorsal leaves of wild type (Gifu) and Ljspk1 144
mutants revealed that wild-type pavement cells had a clear neck and lobe, whereas 145
those on Ljspk1 leaves were nearly round (Supplemental Figure 1I and J). The 146
phenotypes of these Ljspk1 mutants were similar to those reported for the Arabidopsis 147
spk1-1 mutant (Qiu et al., 2002). These results suggest that LjSPK1 is involved in the 148
polarized growth of cells in L. japonicus. 149
We analyzed the infection and nodulation phenotypes of the Ljspk1 mutants 150
following inoculation with M. loti R7A constitutively expressing GFP or lacZ. Wild 151
type (Gifu) and Ljspk1 wild-type siblings (sibling) produced normal elongated ITs in 152
curled root hairs (Figure 2A, Supplemental Figure 2A, B and D). In the Ljspk1 153
mutants, infection initiated normally from a curled root hair, but some ITs showed 154
anomalous growth patterns, including the formation of sac-like structures or 155
depolarized loop shapes inside the root hairs (Figure 2B–D, Supplemental Figure 2C 156
and E). We counted the total number of infection events in the Ljspk1 mutants 1 week 157
after inoculation. The number of infection events including infection foci (foci), ITs in 158
root hairs (IT), and ITs extending into cortex cells (rIT) was significantly lower in the 159
Ljspk1 mutants than in wild type. In addition, there were significantly more abnormal 160
ITs (“abnormal” in Figure 2) in the Ljspk1 mutants than in wild type (Figure 2E). 161
Because the Ljspk1 mutants had shorter primary roots than the wild type 162
(Supplemental Figure 2F and I), we calculated the number of infection events per 163
centimeter (cm). The number of infection foci and ITs per cm root did not differ 164
significantly between wild type and the Ljspk1 mutants except that Ljspk1-2 had 165
fewer rITs (Figure 2F). However, both Ljspk1 mutants had more abnormal infection 166
events than the wild type and Ljspk1 siblings (Figure 2F). These results suggest that 167
the infection events were not significantly affected, but the polarized growth of ITs 168
was markedly affected, in the Ljspk1 mutants. At 2 weeks after inoculation, the wild 169
type had produced abundant pink mature nodules, while the Ljspk1 mutants had 170
produced fewer nodules per plant (Supplemental Figure 2G, J and K). Light 171
microscopy of semi-thin sections of nodules stained with toluidine-blue revealed that 172
Ljspk1-1 nodules had fewer infected cells than the wild type and Ljspk1-1 siblings’ 173
nodules (Supplemental Figure 2H). 174
Next, we explored the role of LjSPK1 by generating LjSPK1-overexpressing 175
lines (LjSPK1-OX) and lines with knocked-down LjSPK1 expression (LjSPK1-Ri). 176
The LjSPK1-knockdown lines were generated by introducing an RNAi vector and the 177
LjSPK1-OX lines were generated by introducing the LjSPK1 cDNA driven by the L. 178
japonicus Ubiquitin promoter into wild-type L. japonicus hairy roots. Compared with 179
empty vector (EV) control, the LjSPK1-Ri lines had markedly fewer infection events, 180
but the LjSPK1-OX lines had increased numbers of infection events, including 181
infection foci and ITs (Figure 2G and H). The LjSPK1-Ri lines had shorter roots than 182
the EV control (Supplemental Figure 2L). Analysis of the infection events revealed 183
that both the LjSPK1-Ri and LjSPK1-OX lines had more abnormal infection events per 184
cm of root than the EV control (Figure 2I). The phenotype of LjSPK1-Ri was similar 185
to that of the Ljspk1 LORE1 insertion mutants. RT-qPCR analysis revealed that 186
LjSPK1 transcript levels were significantly lower in the LjSPK1-Ri lines and 187
significantly higher in the LjSPK1-OX lines compared to the control (Supplemental 188
Figure 2M). Together, these results demonstrate that LjSPK1 is required for the 189
rhizobial infection process and is involved in the polarized growth of ITs in L. 190
japonicus. 191
192
SPK1 Interacts with Three L. japonicus ROP GTPases in Yeast Cells, but Only 193
LjROP6 Is Required for Polarized Growth of ITs 194
AtSPK1 is a DOCK-family GEF protein, and DHR2 is the GEF catalytic domain that 195
facilitates the nucleotide exchange activity of ROP GTPases (Basu et al., 2008). We 196
were interested in determining which ROP GTPase is activated by LjSPK1 to regulate 197
rhizobial infection in L. japonicus. BLAST searches of the L. japonicus genome 198
revealed 10 ROP GTPases. We conducted phylogenetic analysis of ROP GTPases in 199
A. thaliana, L. japonicus, and M. truncatula (Supplemental Figure 3A). Because 200
AtSPK1 interacts and facilitate nucleotide exchange with type I ROP GTPase, and 201
most ROP GTPases are membrane-localized proteins, we used the DUAL membrane 202
yeast two-hybrid system to determine which type I ROP GTPase interacts with the 203
LjSPK1 DHR2 domain (named SPK1-DHR2). Of the four type I and one type II ROP 204
GTPases examined, three type I ROP GTPases (LjROP1, LjROP3, and LjROP6) 205
interacted with the LjSPK1 DHR2 domain in yeast cells (Supplemental Figure 3B). 206
No interaction was detected between LjSPK1 DHR2 and LjROP5 or LjROP10 in 207
yeast cells (Supplemental Figure 3B). 208
To explore whether these three type I LjROPs function in rhizobial infection, we 209
obtained their LORE1 insertion mutants (30000786 with an insertion at 83 bp in 210
LjROP1; 30000537 with an insertion at 67 bp before the start codon in LjROP3; and 211
30031226 with an insertion at 258 bp in LjROP6). We then obtained homozygotes of 212
these insertion mutants. RT-qPCR analysis confirmed that endogenous LjROP 213
transcript levels were significantly reduced in all three Ljrop mutants (Supplemental 214
Figure 3C). We analyzed the root hair and infection phenotypes of the mutants. First, 215
we observed the root hairs of the mutants at 2 days after germination with or without 216
rhizobial inoculation. In the absence of rhizobial inoculation, the roots of wild-type 217
plants formed straight root hairs, but more than half of the plants in lines Ljrop1 218
(15/30), Ljrop3 (18/26), and Ljrop6-1 (20/34) formed branched root hairs or root hairs 219
with swollen tips (Figure 3A). At 18 h after M. loti R7A/lacZ inoculation, both the 220
wild type and Ljrop mutants displayed rhizobia-induced root hair deformation in the 221
infection zone, with no distinguishable differences between these lines (Figure 3B). 222
These observations suggest that all three LjROP GTPases play roles in root hair 223
development and respond normally to rhizobia. 224
We further analyzed IT formation and infection events after rhizobial inoculation. 225
There were no differences in IT formation or infection events between wild type and 226
Ljrop1 or Ljrop3, but there were fewer infection events in Ljrop6-1 than in wild type 227
(Figure 3G). Interestingly, Ljrop6-1 contained some misdirected ITs in the root hairs, 228
which were similar to, but more severe than, those in Ljspk1 (Figure 3F and described 229
in detail below). However, this phenotype was not observed in wild type, Ljrop1, or 230
Ljrop3 plants (Figure 3C–E). To analyze whether these LjROPs play functionally 231
redundant roles during rhizobial infection, we crossed Ljrop1 × Ljrop3 and Ljrop1 × 232
Ljrop6-1 to obtain the Ljrop1 Ljrop3 and Ljrop1 Ljrop6-1 double mutants. We 233
analyzed the infection events in these mutants after inoculation with M. loti 234
R7A/LacZ. Compared with wild-type plants, Ljrop1 Ljrop3 plants had more infection 235
foci but no misdirected ITs, and Ljrop1 Ljrop6-1 plants produced approximately the 236
same number of misdirected ITs as Ljrop6-1 (Supplemental Figure 3D). These results 237
indicate that ROP1, ROP3, and ROP6 affect the polarized growth of root hairs in L. 238
japonicus, but only LjROP6 is required for the polarized growth of ITs in root hairs. 239
The results also indicate that the misdirection of ITs in Ljrop6-1 is not caused by a 240
deficiency in root hair development. 241
242
LjROP6 Is Required for the Polarized Growth of ITs in L. japonicus 243
To confirm the notion that ROP6 is required for the polarized growth of ITs in root 244
hairs, we obtained two more LORE1 insertion lines: 30142846 (Ljrop6-2) and 245
30103232 (Ljrop6-3), with insertions at 505 bp after and 114 bp before the LjROP6 246
start codon, respectively (Supplemental Figure 4A). RT-qPCR analysis of 247
homozygous Ljrop6-2 and Ljrop6-3 plants showed that LjROP6 transcript levels were 248
significantly lower in these plants than in wild-type plants (Supplemental Figure 4E). 249
We observed the root hair phenotypes of the Ljrop6-2 and Ljrop6-3 mutants at 2 250
days after germination. Both before and after rhizobial inoculation, the root hair 251
phenotypes and responses to rhizobia of the Ljrop6-2 and Ljrop6-3 mutants were 252
similar to those of Ljrop6-1 (Supplemental Figure 5A and B). We analyzed rhizobial 253
symbiosis in these three Ljrop6 mutants after M. loti R7A/LacZ inoculation. After 254
rhizobial infection, the three Ljrop6 mutants produced normal ITs like those in the 255
wild type (Figure 4A). However, as noted above, some ITs in the Ljrop6 mutants 256
were misdirected or tangled in the root epidermal cells (Figure 4B–E), suggesting that 257
the ITs became misdirected as they elongated from the infection chamber down to the 258
cortex nodule primordium. Compared to the wild type, the Ljrop6 mutants had 259
significantly fewer infection events and formed more misdirected ITs at 5 days after 260
inoculation with M. loti R7A/lacZ (Figure 4F and G). At 2 weeks after M. loti 261
R7A/lacZ inoculation, the Ljrop6 mutants and wild-type plants produced normal 262
mature pink nodules (Supplemental Figure 4B). The total nodule number was not 263
significantly different between the Ljrop6 mutants and wild-type plants 264
(Supplemental Figure 4C and D). 265
To further confirm the notion that LjROP6 is required for the polarized growth 266
of ITs, we generated transgenic hairy roots in the Ljrop6-1 background using the 267
LjROP6 native promoter to drive the expression of LjROP6 cDNA fused with 268
mCherry (pLjROP6:LjROP6-mCherry). The disorientated ITs in Ljrop6-1 were 269
rescued by complementation with ROP6-mCherry (Figure 4H). Statistical analyses 270
showed that the complemented group (pLjROP6:LjROP6-mCherry/Ljrop6-1) had 271
more ITs and rITs and fewer misdirected ITs compared with the EV control at the 272
same time point (Figure 4I). LjROP6 transcript levels were significantly higher in 273
Ljrop6-1 hairy roots than the control (Supplemental Figure 4F). Together, these 274
observations confirm the notion that LjROP6 is required for the polarized growth of 275
ITs in L. japonicus. 276
277
LjSPK1 Physically Interacts with LjROP6 in Planta and Activates Its GTPase 278
Activity in Vitro 279
As described above, LjROP6 interacted with LjSPK1 in yeast cells. We further 280
confirmed their interaction in Nicotiana benthamiana leaf pavement cells using 281
split-luciferase complementation and co-immunoprecipitation (Co-IP) assays. 282
LjROP6 interacted with the LjSPK1-DHR2 catalytic domain in split-luciferase 283
complementation (Figure 5A) and Co-IP assays (Figure 5B). However, we did not 284
detect co-precipitation of LjSPK1 with LjROP10, a type II ROP GTPase, in our Co-IP 285
assays (Figure 5B). The activation of ROP GTPases relies on GDP and GTP exchange, 286
and this cycle requires GEFs to facilitate the dissociation of GDP (Kost, 2008). We 287
therefore investigated the ability of LjSPK1 to interact with LjROP6 in the dominant 288
negative (DN, D121A) or constitutively active (CA, G15V) form. LjSPK1-DHR2 289
interacted more strongly with the LjROP6 DN form than with the LjROP6 CA form 290
in Co-IP assays (Figure 5B). These results suggest that LjSPK1 preferentially 291
interacts with the inactive form, but not the active form, of LjROP6 to activate the 292
nucleotide exchange activity of LjROP6. 293
The LjSPK1 DHR2 domain is known to activate small GTPases (Basu et al. 294
2008, Wang et al. 2018). To examine whether LjSPK1 facilitates the guanine 295
nucleotide exchange activity of LjROP6, we tested the GEF activity of the LjSPK1 296
DHR2 domain in vitro using a fluorescence spectroscopy-based procedure (Gu et al., 297
2006, Wang et al., 2017). First, we expressed and purified GST-tagged 298
LjSPK1-DHR2 and unlabeled-GDP His-tagged LjROP6 in Escherichia coli. To start 299
the nucleotide exchange reaction, we added fluorescently labeled 300
N-methylanthraniloyl (mant)-GTP and unlabeled-GDP LjROP6 to the reaction buffer 301
and recorded the fluorescence values for 600 s. The intrinsic guanine nucleotide 302
exchange rate of LjROP6 increased with increasing reaction time and with increasing 303
concentrations of LjROP6 (Figure 5C). Next, to investigate the effect of LjSPK1 on 304
the guanine nucleotide exchange rate of LjROP6, we added LjSPK1-DHR2 protein to 305
reaction buffer containing 0.5 µM unlabeled-GDP LjROP6 protein and 1 µM 306
mant-GTP before recording the change in fluorescence intensity. The LjSPK1 GEF 307
activity towards LjROP6 increased with increasing LjSPK1-DHR2 concentrations 308
(Figure 5D). These results demonstrate that LjROP6 has intrinsic guanine nucleotide 309
exchange activity, which is enhanced by SPK1. 310
311
LjROP6 Co-localizes and Interacts with LjSPK1 in the Plasma Membrane 312
LjROP6 was shown to be localized to the plasma membrane (PM) and cytoplasm (Ke 313
et al., 2012), but SPK1 is localized to the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) (Zhang et al., 314
2010; Wang et al., 2018). To validate the subcellular localization of LjROP6 and 315
confirm its interaction with LjSPK1, we analyzed the subcellular localization of 316
LjROP6 in N. benthamiana leaf cells and L. japonicus roots. We co-expressed 317
GFP-LjROP6 or LjROP6-mCherry under the control of the L. japonicus Ubiquitin 318
promoter in N. benthamiana leaf cells. In these analyses, LjROP6 localized to the PM, 319
regardless of whether it was tagged with a fluorescent marker at its N-terminus or 320
C-terminus (Supplemental Figure 6A–C). We then expressed LjROP6-mCherry in 321
wild-type L. japonicus hairy roots and monitored its localization before and after 322
inoculation with M. loti R7A/mTag. Signals from mCherry were observed at the PM 323
in root hairs without rhizobia (Supplemental Figure 6D) and in elongating or curled 324
root hairs after inoculation with M. loti R7A (Supplemental Figure 6E). The 325
LjROP6-mCherry fusion protein displayed a similar subcellular localization pattern 326
regardless of whether it was expressed under the control of the Ubiquitin promoter 327
(Supplemental Figure 6D and E) or the LjROP6 native promoter (Supplemental 328
Figure 6F). 329
Next, we analyzed the subcellular localization of LjSPK1. We transformed N. 330
benthamiana leaves with Agrobacterium carrying LjSPK1-YFP and observed the 331
localization of LjSPK1 by monitoring the fluorescence of YFP by laser scanning 332
confocal microscopy. LjSPK1 showed a punctate distribution close to the PM or 333
cytoplasm (Figure 6A). Following plasmolysis using 30% sucrose, LjSPK1-YFP was 334
not associated with the cell wall (Figure 6B). To examine whether LjSPK1 localizes 335
to the PM, we stained the N. benthamiana leaves with the PM localization marker 336
FM4-64. LjSPK1 showed almost no co-localization with FM4-64 (Figure 6C and E). 337
AtSPK1 and OsSPK1 are localized to subdomains of the ER (Zhang et al., 2010, 338
Wang et al., 2018). To determine whether this is also the case for LjSPK1, we 339
co-expressed LjSPK1-YFP with the ER marker HDEL-mRFP in N. benthamiana 340
leaves. LjSPK1 colocalized with the ER marker (Figure 6D and F). These findings 341
suggest that LjSPK1 is associated with subdomains of the ER. We then explored the 342
subcellular distribution of LjSPK1-eGFP in L. japonicus hairy roots. LjSPK1-eGFP 343
displayed PM and punctate distribution close to the nucleus in L. japonicus root hairs 344
(Figure 6G), and LjSPK1-eGFP also co-localized with the PM marker FM4-64 345
(Figure 6H). LjSPK1-GFP expressed in Ljrop6-1 hairy roots also showed a punctate 346
distribution close to the nucleus (Supplemental Figure 7A), similar to that of 347
LjSPK1-eGFP expressed in the wild type. After rhizobia inoculation, LjSPK1-eGFP 348
was detected in the PM of root hairs with infection foci or elongated ITs (Figure 6I 349
and J). 350
We then co-expressed LjSPK1-YFP and LjROP6-mCherry in N. benthamiana 351
leaf pavement cells. In contrast to the punctate localization of LjSPK1-YFP when 352
expressed alone, LjSPK1-YFP co-expressed with LjROP6-mCherry showed reduced 353
punctate distribution, and most LjSPK1-YFP signals were localized in patches on the 354
PM (Figure 7A–C). This observation suggests that LjROP6 promotes the PM 355
localization of LjSPK1. 356
We evaluated the interaction between LjSPK1 and LjROP6 in planta via 357
bimolecular fluorescence complementation (BiFC) assays, with C-terminal and 358
N-terminal split-Venus fragments fused to LjSPK1 and LjROP6, respectively, driven 359
by the L. japonicus or A. thaliana Ubiquitin promoter. When this construct 360
(pLjUb:LjSPK1-cVenus/pAtUb:LjROP6-nVenus) was agro-infiltrated into N. 361
benthamiana leaf cells, Venus fluorescence was detected in the PM and in some 362
punctate structures adjacent to the PM (Figure 7D). This distribution was confirmed 363
by plasmolysis experiments using 30% sucrose (Figure 7E). These results confirm the 364
notion that LjSPK1 interacts with LjROP6 at the PM. We then introduced this 365
construct into wild-type L. japonicus hairy roots and monitored the localization of 366
Venus fluorescence signals after inoculation with M. loti R7A/mTag. Venus 367
fluorescence signals were detected in the PM of deformed root hairs (Figure 7F) as 368
well as in infection foci (Supplemental Figure 7B). We also expressed these 369
constructs in the M. truncatula sunn-1 mutant, which had many more infection events 370
than wild type. Venus fluorescence was observed in the infection chamber of the root 371
hairs at the site of the initiating IT (Figure 7G and Supplemental Figure 7C). 372
373
Polarized Growth of Root Hairs and Rhizobial Infection Are Affected in 374
LjROP6-overexpression, CA, and DN Lines 375
To explore the role of LjROP6 in root hair development and IT formation, we 376
generated LjROP6-overexpression, LjROP6 CA, and LjROP6 DN hairy roots with 377
each construct under the control of the L. japonicus Ubiquitin promoter. Green 378
fluorescent protein (GFP) signals were visualized in the transformed roots. In the EV 379
control, root hairs showed normal tip growth, and the root hairs grew straight and 380
away from the primary root axis (n=30) (Supplemental Figure 8A and B). However, 381
in hairy roots overexpressing LjROP6, root hairs were morphologically similar to 382
those of the control in that they displayed normal tip growth, but approximately 383
one-third of the hairy roots formed shorter root hairs (25/82) (Supplemental Figure 384
8A–C). Surprisingly, all LjROP6 CA (42/42) and LjROP6 DN (51/51) lines formed 385
completely depolarized ballooning root hairs on transgenic roots (Supplemental 386
Figure 8A–C). 387
We analyzed the infection events in the LjROP6-overexpression, LjROP6 CA, 388
and LjROP6 DN transgenic hairy roots after M. loti R7A/lacZ inoculation. The 389
LjROP6-overexpression line formed elongated ITs similar to those of the EV control 390
but had a few infection foci in uncurled root hairs and formed some disorientated ITs 391
(Supplemental Figure 8D and E). The number of infection events (foci and ITs) in 392
hairy roots appeared to be slightly higher in the LjROP6-overexpression line than in 393
the EV control, but this difference was not significant (Supplemental Figure 8H). In 394
the hairy roots of LjROP6 CA and LjROP6 DN, most ITs were abnormally short and 395
formed without root hair curling (Supplemental Figure 8F and G). In addition, the 396
number of infection events was significantly reduced in LjROP6 CA and LjROP6 DN 397
hairy roots vs. the EV control (Supplemental Figure 8H). LjROP6 transcript levels in 398
hairy roots were higher in the LjROP6-overexpression, LjROP6 CA, and LjROP6 DN 399
lines than in the EV control (Supplemental Figure 8I). These observations demonstrate 400
that LjROP6 homeostasis is essential for its function in root hair development and IT 401
formation. 402
We investigated the functions of LjROP1 and LjROP3 in root hair development by 403
expressing LjROP1 or LjROP3 cDNA under the control of the LjUb promoter in 404
wild-type L. japonicus hairy roots and analyzing their CA and DN forms. In all of 405
these transgenic lines, the hairy roots formed shorter root hairs than the EV control 406
(Supplemental Figure 9), which is similar to the phenotype of LjROP6-overexpressing 407
L. japonicus hairy roots. 408
409
Actin filaments are Disordered in the Root Hairs of Ljrop6-1 Compared to 410
Wild-type L. japonicus 411
The actin cytoskeleton is important for root hair tip growth. To determine whether 412
LjROP6 regulates the arrangement of actin filaments to influence the polarized 413
growth of root hair tips, we used Alexa Fluor 488-conjugated phalloidin to stain wild 414
type and Ljrop6-1 roots. As expected, the root hairs of wild-type plants predominantly 415
displayed the characteristic arrangement of actin filaments in long cables aligned 416
longitudinally (Supplemental Figure 10A). However, 70% of Ljrop6-1 root hairs had 417
fewer longitudinally aligned actin filaments and significantly more transversely 418
oriented ones compared to the wild type (Supplemental Figure 10B). Most of the short 419
swollen or medium-length root hairs of Ljrop6-1 showed disordered or web-like 420
arrangements of actin filaments (Supplemental Figure 10C). These results indicate 421
that LjROP6 affects the arrangement of actin filaments in root hairs to regulate their 422
development. 423
424
DISCUSSION 425
Rhizobial ITs elongate following the migration of the nucleus along and within the 426
root hairs via polar tip growth. ROP GTPases are key components required for the 427
polarized growth of cells during processes such as pollen tube elongation and root 428
hair development (Zheng and Yang, 2000; Samaj et al., 2006). LjROP6 interacts with 429
the NF receptor LjNFR5 to mediate nodulation, and LjROP6 associates with LjCHC1 430
(Ke et al., 2012; Wang et al., 2015). The CHC1-hub domain, a dominant effector of 431
clathrin-mediated endocytosis, impairs rhizobial infection (Wang et al., 2015). Here, 432
we demonstrated that LjROP6 is required for the polarized growth of ITs in root hairs. 433
GTPases act as molecular switches that fluctuate between an inactive GDP-bound 434
form and an active GTP-bound form. We found that the DOCK-family GEF protein 435
LjSPK1 interacts with, and activates, LjROP6. We also found that LjROP6 promotes 436
the localization of LjSPK1 to the PM and that this may be important for its function. 437
Together, our results show that the DOCK-family GEF LjSPK1 activates LjROP6 to 438
mediate the polarized growth of ITs, and they provide evidence that early NF 439
signaling is connected to morphological changes associated with rhizobial infection. 440
Rhizobial invasion into host plants via the IT requires an actively growing root 441
hair. Inside the root hair, an infection chamber forms and elongates to form the IT, the 442
tubular structure that guides bacteria toward cortical cells (Fournier et al., 2008, 443
Fournier et al., 2015). ROP GTPases play important roles in the polarized growth of 444
cells. ROPs are polarized into single, discrete PM domains in tip-growing cells such 445
as pollen tubes and root hairs (Lin et al., 1996; Molendijk et al., 2001). The NF 446
receptor LjNFR5 interacts with LjROP6 to mediate IT formation and nodulation (Ke 447
et al., 2012). In the current study, we identified three LORE1 insertion mutants of 448
Ljrop6. All three mutants were able to form normal ITs after rhizobial inoculation. 449
However, compared to the wild type, the mutants had fewer infection events (foci and 450
ITs) and formed many more disoriented ITs in root hairs. This observation suggests 451
that LjROP6 mediates the polarized growth of ITs in root hairs. 452
Disoriented ITs have also been observed in other mutants, such as mutants of the 453
cytokine receptor gene LjLhk1 (Murray et al., 2007) and topoisomerase VI (TOPO6A) 454
subunit LjSUNERGOS1 or LjVAG1 (Suzaki et al., 2014, Yoon et al., 2014). These 455
mutants exhibit misdirected ITs and highly defective nodule organogenesis, which in 456
turn affects nodule primordium formation. However, in the Ljrop6 mutants observed 457
in the current study, the ITs formed loops and showed disoriented growth in root 458
epidermis cells, but nodule formation was not affected. This finding suggests that the 459
LjROP6-mediated polar elongation of ITs is not associated with nodule primordium 460
formation. The Golgi/trans-Golgi-localized Rab GTPase PvRabA2 is required for IT 461
progression and the maintenance of membrane integrity in common bean (Phaseolus 462
vulgaris) (Blanco et al., 2009; Dalla et al., 2017). In M. truncatula, the 463
LIN-VPY-Exo70H4 complex shows a polar distribution in pre-ITs, suggesting that 464
this complex mediates the polarized growth of ITs via exocytosis (Liu et al., 2019b). 465
In the future, it would be interesting to determine whether LjROP6 interacts with this 466
complex to guide the polarized growth of ITs. 467
ROP GTPases regulate cell growth and shape by organizing the actin filaments 468
that drive cytoplasmic streaming and vesicle trafficking in the cytoskeleton. These 469
GTPases also affect the arrangement of cortical membrane-associated microtubules, 470
which guide cell wall deposition via cellulose synthase complexes (Fu et al., 2005; 471
Endler and Persson, 2011; Tominaga and Ito, 2015). ROP GTPase activity is 472
regulated by GAPs, GEFs, and RhoGDIs (Yang, 2002; Kost, 2008). SPK1 is a 473
DOCK-family GEF that is conserved in animals and plants (Meller et al., 2005). In 474
Arabidopsis, AtSPK1 has been implicated in activating ROP signaling to regulate 475
actin polymerization via WAVE and ARP2/3 complexes in leaves (Qiu et al., 2002; 476
Basu et al., 2008). Similarly, in rice, OsPit interacts with OsSPK1 to activate 477
OsRAC1 and trigger immune responses (Wang et al., 2019). The current results 478
indicate that LjSPK1 interacts with and activates LjROP6 and that both LjSPK1 and 479
LjROP6 are involved in the polarized growth of ITs following rhizobial infection. The 480
formation of ITs requires several components of the WAVE/SCAR-ARP2/3 complex, 481
including NAP, PIR, SCARN, and ARPC1 (Yokota et al., 2009; Hossain et al., 2012; 482
Qiu et al., 2015). It will be important to investigate whether the LjSPK1-LjROP6 483
module interacts with the WAVE/SCAR-ARP2/3 complex to regulate actin 484
rearrangement and mediate IT formation. 485
Exocytosis and the polar inhibition of clathrin-dependent endocytosis regulate 486
the polarized growth of cells in both animals and plants. Studies of ROPs/RACs have 487
revealed that these processes are important targets of Rho-GTPase signaling 488
(Craddock et al., 2012; Craddock and Yang, 2012; Feiguelman et al., 2018). For 489
example, the yeast exocyst subunit SEC3 is a direct effector of the Rho GTPase 490
Cdc42. In Arabidopsis, the ROP effector ICR1/RIP1 (INTERACTOR OF 491
CONSTITUTIVE ACTIVE ROP1) interacts with the Arabidopsis SEC3 homolog and 492
is required for the polar localization of PIN1 (Lavy et al., 2007; Hazak et al., 2010). 493
SPK1 is required for the auxin-activated ROP6-RIC1 pathway to inhibit the 494
internalization of PIN2 by stabilizing actin microfilaments. These processes affect 495
auxin distribution and lateral root development (Lin et al., 2012). In L. japonicus, 496
LjROP6 interacts with LjCHC1 and is involved in rhizobial infection (Wang et al., 497
2015). Interestingly, LjROP6 alone localizes to the PM but shows a punctate 498
distribution on the PM when it is co-expressed with LjCHC1 (Wang et al., 2015) or 499
LjSPK1, as demonstrated in the BiFC assay between LjSPK1 and LjROP6 in N. 500
benthamiana leaves in the current study. Further studies are needed to investigate 501
whether LjSPK1-activated LjROP6 can activate other downstream effectors such as 502
RICs or RIPs. Such interactions could control the polarized growth of rhizobial ITs 503
via effects on the organization of actin microfilaments, auxin distribution, and 504
exocytosis and endocytosis pathways. 505
AtSPK1 is localized to subdomains of the ER (Zhang et al., 2010), and OsSPK1 506
(Wang et al., 2018) and LjSPK1 (this study) show a punctate distribution and 507
co-localize with an ER marker. However, co-expressing OsSPK1-OsRAC1 or 508
LjSPK1-LjROP6 in N. benthamiana leaves enhanced the PM localization of SPK1, 509
suggesting that OsSPK1-OsRAC1 or LjSPK1-LjROP6 interact at the PM (Wang et al., 510
2018). In the current study, LjSPK1 alone was distributed at the PM and in punctate 511
spots around the nucleus in L. japonicus, but it interacted with LjROP6 in the PM and 512
infection pocket in curled root hairs of L. japonicus infected with M. loti. In rice, 513
OsRacGEF1 is transported from the ER to the PM with OsCERK1 via a vesicle 514
trafficking pathway (Akamatsu et al., 2013). It would be interesting to explore which 515
pathway is involved in the translocation of LjSPK1 from the ER to the PM. 516
GEFs are activated by PM-bound receptor-like kinases (RLKs) (Akamatsu et al., 517
2013; Liao et al., 2017). In mammals, the kinase Akt and the protein phosphatase 518
PP2A interact with the DHR2 domain of DOCK6. DOCK6 is phosphorylated by Akt 519
and dephosphorylated by PP2A at Ser1194; the phosphorylation status of DOCK6 520
determines its ability to promote axon growth (Miyamoto et al., 2013). A 521
phosphoproteomic study of root nodule symbiosis in M. truncatula revealed that two 522
phosphoisoforms of DOCK-family proteins, MtSPK1 and DOCK7, displayed lower 523
phosphorylation levels upon NF treatment in nfp and dmi3 than in the wild type. 524
Those findings suggest that rhizobia infection may affect the phosphorylation status 525
of MtSPK1 (Rose et al., 2012). Thus, it will be important to investigate whether there 526
is a kinase that affects the phosphorylation status of LjSPK1 to regulate its activity 527
towards LjROP6 during the establishment of symbiosis. 528
ROP GTPases play an essential role in controlling the polarized growth of pollen 529
tubes and root hairs. In Arabidopsis, AtSPK1 functions as a GEF that interacts with 530
and activates a series of ROP GTPases (Basu et al., 2008). Our results show that 531
LjSPK1 interacts with three type I ROP GTPases in L. japonicus. All three LjROP 532
GTPases are required for the polarized growth of root hairs. The Ljrop mutants in this 533
study formed branched and swollen root hairs, while lines overexpressing the LjROP 534
GTPases and their CA or DN forms produced short, ballooning root hairs. These 535
phenomena are not consistent with the previous finding that plants expressing the DN 536
and CA forms of ROP showed different phenotypes (Molendijk et al., 2001; Jones et 537
al., 2002; Lei et al., 2015). This discrepancy can be explained by the notion that ROP 538
GTPases function as molecular switches. Because the homeostasis of their activity is 539
strictly regulated, either stronger or weaker activity will affect their function. 540
Although LjSPK1 can interact with three ROP GTPases, only one of them, LjROP6, 541
is required for the polar elongation of ITs in root hairs. Perhaps LjROP6 interacts with 542
LjNFR5 to transduce NF signaling to mediate the progression and elongation of ITs. 543
Interestingly, in a study of M. truncatula ROP10, only the MtROP10 CA form 544
showed defects in the polarized growth of root hairs; its infection phenotype was very 545
similar to those of the LjROP6 CA and LjROP6 DN forms. However, although 546
MtROP10 was able to interact with the NF receptor MtNFP and it was required for 547
root hair deformation, it was not required for the polarized growth of ITs (Lei et al., 548
2015). Therefore, the current and previous findings suggest that different ROP 549
GTPases that are associated with NF signaling mediate different infection processes. 550
Prenylation is required for the membrane attachment and function of type I ROP 551
GTPases, and LjROP6 is a type I ROP GTPase. When we examined the subcellular 552
localization of LjROP6 in N. benthamiana, the placement of the fluorescent protein at 553
the N-terminus or C-terminus of this protein did not affect its PM localization. 554
Moreover, in the complementation assay, LjROP6 tagged with mCherry at its 555
C-terminus fully rescued the infection phenotype of Ljrop6-1. These results suggest 556
that the prenylation of LjROP6 has minor effects on its function, which are consistent 557
with the results of another study in Arabidopsis (Sorek et al., 2011). 558
The penetration of bacteria into legume roots is a key step in the specific 559
recognition of compatible rhizobia during the formation and progression of ITs. The 560
current and previous findings provide genetic evidence that the molecular machinery 561
associated with the LjNFR5-LjROP6-LjSPK1 module is involved in the vesicle 562
trafficking and cytoskeleton rearrangements required for the polarized growth of ITs. 563
Thus, we suggest that the LjNFR5-LjROP6-LjSPK1 module has been co-opted to 564
participate in some events in rhizobial infection, particularly the polarized growth of 565
ITs (Supplemental Figure 11A and B). Our results also show that LjSPK1 can activate 566
other type I ROP GTPases such as LjROP1 and LjROP3 and that these ROP GTPases 567
are required for the growth of the root hair tip (Supplemental Figure 11C). 568
569
METHODS 570
Biological Materials and Strains 571
Lotus japonicus accession Gifu B-129 was used in this study. The Ljrop and Ljspk1 572
mutants were obtained from the LORE1 transposon insertion library at Lotus Base 573
(https://lotus.au.dk) (Fukai et al., 2012; Urbanski et al., 2012). The mutants were 574
genotyped by PCR and sequenced using the primers shown in Supplemental Data Set 575
1. 576
The rhizobium strain Mesorhizobium loti R7A carrying pXLGD4 (lacZ), 577
pMP2444 (GFP), or mTag was used for infection and the nodulation assays. The 578
Agrobacterium rhizogenes strain AR1193 was used for hairy root transformation of L. 579
japonicus and M. truncatula roots, and the A. tumefaciens strain EHA105 was used 580
for transient expression in N. benthamiana. Plasmids were transformed into 581
Escherichia coli DH10B or DH5α for cloning or into E. coli Rosetta (DE3) for protein 582
expression. The yeast strain NMY51 was used for the DUAL membrane yeast 583
two-hybrid system. 584
585
Cloning, DNA Manipulation, and Plasmid Construction 586
The coding sequences (CDS) of the LjROPs and LjSPK1 were amplified from the 587
Gifu cDNA library by PCR amplification; the CA and DN forms of LjROPs were 588
generated with a Hieff MutTM Site-Directed Mutagenesis Kit (Yeasen Biotechnology, 589
Shanghai, China) as per the manufacturer’s instructions. 590
For expression analysis of LjSPK1 in L. japonicus hairy roots, the LjSPK1 591
promoter (2 kb upstream of the start codon) was amplified from Gifu genomic DNA 592
by PCR. The PCR product was inserted into pDONR207 by BP reaction (Invitrogen), 593
and combined into pKGWFS7 to generate the pLjSPK1:GUS construct by LR 594
reaction (Invitrogen). 595
For the LjSPK1 RNAi construct, the CDS fragment of LjSPK1 was amplified by 596
PCR. The PCR product was inserted into pDONR207 by BP reaction (Invitrogen) and 597
combined into pUB-GWS-GFP to generate the LjSPK1-Ri construct by LR reaction 598
(Invitrogen). 599
To overexpress LjSPK1 or LjROPs in L. japonicus hairy roots, the LjSPK1, 600
LjROPs, LsROPs CA, and LjROPs DN CDS were transferred from X-pDONR207 into 601
pUB-GW-GFP by LR reaction to generate the LjSPK1-OX, LjROPs-OX, LjROPs CA, 602
or DN constructs, respectively. 603
For the DUAL membrane yeast two-hybrid system, the PCR products and 604
pCCW-STE or pDSL-Nx were digested with Sfi1 and the LjROPs and LjSPK1-DHR2 605
were inserted into pCCW-STE and pDSL-Nx, respectively, using T4 DNA ligase 606
(Takara, Dalian, China). 607
To measure guanine nucleotide exchange activity, the LjROP6 and 608
LjSPK1-DHR2 PCR products were recombined into pDONR207 by BP reaction 609
(Invitrogen). LjROP6 pDONR207 and LjSPK1-DHR2 pDONR207 were recombined 610
into pHGWA with a His-tag or pGGWA with a GST-tag by LR reaction and 611
transformed into E. coli Rosetta for protein expression. 612
For the luciferase biomolecular complementation assays in N. benthamiana, the 613
PCR products and luciferase vector pCambia1300-35S-nLuc or 614
pCambia1300-35S-cLuc were digested with Kpn1 and Sal1, and LjSPK1-DHR2 and 615
LjROP6 were inserted into pCambia1300-X-nLuc or pCambia1300-cLuc-X using T4 616
DNA ligase. 617
For co-immunoprecipitation assays in N. benthamiana, the PCR products 618
(LjROP6, LjROP6 CA, LjROP6 DN, or LjROP10) were inserted into destination 619
vector pCambia1305-35S-Myc following Kpn1 and Sal1 digestion. The 620
LjSPK1-DHR2 PCR products were inserted into destination vector 621
pUB-GFP/X-FLAG, which was modified from pUB-GFP (Maekawa et al., 2008; Li 622
et al., 2019), following Kpn1 and Asc1 digestion. 623
To determine the subcellular localization of LjROP6 in L. japonicus leaves and L. 624
japonicus hairy roots, LjROP6 pDONR207 was recombined into pK7WGF2 to 625
generate GFP-LjROP6 by LR reaction. LjROP6 PCR products were inserted into 626
pUB-GFP/X-mCherry (this vector was modified from pUB-GFP) (Li et al., 2019) 627
following Xba1 and Kpn1 digestion using T4 DNA ligase to generate 628
LjROP6-mCherry. 629
For the complementation assay via hairy root transformation of Ljrop6-1, the 630
LjROP6 promoter (1.8Kb upstream of the start codon) was amplified from Gifu 631
genomic DNA by PCR amplification. The PCR products and destination vector 632
pUB-GFP were digested with Pst1 and Xba1, and the LjROP6 promoter was inserted 633
into pUB-GFP using T4 DNA ligase to generate pLjROP6-GFP. pLjROP6-GFP and 634
pUB-GFP/LjROP6-mCherry were digested with Xba1 and Asc1, and 635
LjROP6-mCherry was inserted into pLjROP6-GFP using T4 DNA ligase to generate 636
pLjROP6:LjROP6-mCherry. This vector was also used to determine the subcellular 637
localization of LjROP6 in L. japonicus transformed hairy roots. 638
To determine the subcellular localization of LjSPK1 in N. benthamiana leaves, 639
the LjSPK1 PCR products were inserted into pCambia1300-35S-YFP following Sma1 640
and Spe1 digestion to generate LjSPK1-YFP. For LjSPK1 localization and BiFC 641
analysis in N. benthamiana leaves, L. japonicus, or M. truncatula hairy roots, the 642
LjSPK1-eGFP and BiFC constructs were generated by Golden Gate cloning (Peccoud 643
et al., 2011). The LjSPK1 CDS was synthesized in the level 0 vector pL0V-SC3 644
(Shanghai Xitubio Biotechnology Co., Ltd.). This vector and the EC16570 vector 645
were digested with Bsa1 to generate LjSPK1-eGFP as the level 1 construct. This level 646
1 LjSPK1-eGFP was assembled into EC50507 (https://www.ensa.ac.uk/), adding 647
p35S:NLS-DsRed as a transgenic marker, to generate the level 2 construct 648
LjSPK1-eGFP. The synthesized LjSPK1 CDS in vector pL0V-SC3 was assembled 649
into EC12850 to generate LjSPK1-cVenus; the LjROP6 PCR product was inserted 650
into pL0V-SC3 following Bbs1 digestion, and this construct was assembled into 651
EC12849 to generate LjROP6-nVenus. Finally, these constructs were assembled into 652
EC50507, adding p35S:DsRed as a transgenic marker, to generate the BiFC construct 653
pLjUb:LjSPK1-cVerns/pAtUb:LjROP6-nVenus. 654
All PCR amplification was carried out using high-fidelity DNA polymerase 655
KOD Plus (Toyobo, Osaka, Japan) or MAX (Vazyme, Nanjing, China), and all 656
constructs were confirmed by DNA sequencing. The constructs in destination vectors 657
were introduced into A. rhizogenes AR1193 for hairy root transformation in L. 658
japonicus or M. truncatula or into A. tumefaciens strain EHA105 for transient 659
expression in N. benthamiana by electroporation. All primers are listed in 660
Supplemental Data Set 1, and all constructs are listed in Supplemental Table 1. 661
662
Analysis of Plant Growth, Rhizobial Inoculation, Infection, Nodulation, Root 663
Hairs, and Actin Rearrangement 664
L. japonicus seeds were scarified, surface sterilized in 10% (v/v) sodium hypochlorite 665
for 7 min, and rinsed five times with sterile water. The sterilized seeds were imbibed 666
in water, transferred to 0.8% (v/v) water agar plates, and grown on 22°C in the dark 667
for 3–4 days for germination. The seedlings were transferred to a mixture of perlite 668
and vermiculite (1:1), cultivated in a growth chamber under a 16 h/8 h light (250 669
µmol/m2/s)/dark cycle, and inoculated with rhizobia at 5–7 days after transfer. The 670
infection phenotypes and events were determined at the indicated time points by laser 671
scanning confocal microscopy (FV1000, Olympus, Tokyo, Japan) using GFP-marked 672
M. loti R7A, or light microscopy (ECLIPSE Ni, Nikon, Tokyo, Japan) after staining 673
the roots with 5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolylbeta-D-galacto-pyranoside (X-Gal). 674
To prepare nodule sections, the nodules were fixed in glutaraldehyde (2.5% v/v), 675
embedded in Technovit 7100 resin (Kulzer GmbH, Wehrheim, Germany) according 676
to the manufacturer’s instructions, and cut into 5–10 mm transverse sections with a 677
microtome (RM2265, Leica Microsystems, Wetzlar, Germany). Root nodule sections 678
were co-stained with toluidine blue or Magenta-Gal to visualize GUS or M. loti. 679
To analyze the root hair phenotypes of the Ljrop mutants, the seedlings were 680
transferred to glass slides containing 1 ml liquid FP medium and incubated overnight. 681
The seedlings were inoculated by adding fresh FP medium with or without M. loti 682
R7A (OD600 ~0.01) and incubated in the dark for ~18 h before analysis. The root 683
hairs were observed and imaged under a light microscope (Nikon ECLIPSE Ni). For 684
observation root hairs in L. japonicus hairy roots, transformed hairy roots of the 685
LjROPs-overexpression, LjROPs CA, and LjROPs DN lines were scored by GFP 686
fluorescence using a Nikon SMZ1500 microscope, and then root hairs were observed 687
and imaged under a light microscope (Nikon ECLIPSE Ni). The length of root hairs 688
was measured using ImageJ. Five root hair cells were measured per transformed root, 689
and at least ten transformed roots were scored. 690
Phalloidin staining was done as described previously (Yokota et al., 2009), and 691
actin was observed by laser scanning confocal microscopy (FV1000, Olympus, Tokyo, 692
Japan). 693
All assays were validated in at least three independent experiments. 694
695
Analysis of Promoter:GUS, RNAi, Overexpression, and Complementation in L. 696
japonicus Transformed Hairy Roots 697
The indicated constructs in A. rhizogenes AR1193 were introduced into L. japonicus 698
Gifu or Ljrop6-1 roots on 1/2 B5 medium via hairy root transformation. After 2 weeks, 699
the transformed hairy roots were scored by GFP fluorescence, as observed under a 700
Nikon SMZ1500 microscope. The transformed chimeric plants were transferred to 701
pots filled with a mixture of vermiculite and perlite (1:1) and inoculated with M. loti 702
R7A/lacZ at 5-7 days after transfer. For pLjSPK1:GUS in L. japonicus hairy roots, the 703
hairy roots were stained with both Magenta-Gal and X-Gluc to visualize M. loti R7A 704
and gene expression at the indicated time points. For the LjSPK1-Ri, LjSPK1-OX, and 705
LjROP6 complementation assays, the transgenic roots were stained with X-Gal, and 706
the infection events were counted under a Nikon ECLIPSE Ni light microscope at 5 or 707
7 days after inoculation. At least seven plants were analyzed per experiment. The 708
number of nodules was counted at 2 or 3 weeks after inoculation with M. loti 709
R7A/lacZ using at least nine plants at each time point. These assays were repeated in 710
three individual experiments. 711
712
RNA Extraction and RT-qPCR 713
Total RNA was extracted from plant roots with TRIpure Reagent (Aidlab 714
Biotechnologies, Beijing, China) according to the manufacturer’s instruction and 715
quantified using a Nanodrop 2000 instrument (Thermo Scientific). Reverse 716
transcription of cDNA was performed using TransScript® One-Step gDNA Removal 717
and cDNA Synthesis SuperMix (TransGen Biotech, Beijing, China). RT-PCR was 718
conducted using SYBR® Green Real time PCR Master Mix (Toyobo, Osaka, Japan), 719
and the products were detected using the ABI StepOnePlus PCR system 720
(ThermoFisher). Amplification conditions consisted of an initial denaturation step at 721
95°C for 20 s, 40 cycles at 95°C for 5 s and 60°C for 30 s, followed by a melting 722
curve stage of 95°C for 15 s, 60°C for 60 s and 95°C for 10 s. Ubiquitin 723
(Lj5g3v2060710.1) was used as an internal control, and RT-qPCR data for each 724
sample were normalized to the respective Ubiquitin expression level. Standard errors 725
and statistical significance based on three biological replicates were calculated using 726
the 2-ΔΔCt method. The primers used are shown in Supplemental Data Set 1. 727
728
Scanning Electron Microscopy 729
The leaves of the spk1 mutants were fixed in FAA overnight at 4°C and dehydrated in 730
in an ethanol series (30%, 50%, 70%, 80%, 90%, 95%, and 100% ethanol) for 5 731
minutes per step at room temperature. The leaves were dried using a carbon dioxide 732
critical point drier (LEICA CPD300), transferred onto a copper mount for ion 733
sputtering, and imaged under a scanning electron microscope (JSM-6360LV, JEOL, 734
Tokyo, Japan) using 1 to 5 KV accelerating voltage. 735
736
Phylogenetic Analysis 737
The A. thaliana, M. truncatula, and L. japonicus protein sequences were obtained 738
from the genome databases at TAIR, M. truncatula Mt4.0, and L. japonicus 739
miyakogusa.jp website Version 3.0. Soybean (G. max), common bean (P. vulgaris) 740
and pea (Pisum sativum) SPK1 protein sequences were obtained from Legume 741
Information System (https://www.legumeinfo.org/). Rice (O. sativa) OsSPK1, Homo 742
sapiens DOCK180, nematode (Caenorhabditis elegans) CED-5, fruit fly (Drosophila 743
melanogaster) MYOBLAST CITY (MBC), yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) 744
Ylr422wp, and slime mold (Dictyostelium discoideum) DocA protein sequences were 745
obtained from NCBI. All protein sequences were aligned using ClustalW, and the 746
phylogenetic tree was built using the maximum likelihood method in MEGA7. The 747
percentage of trees in which the associated taxa clustered together is shown next to 748
the branches. Initial trees for the heuristic search were obtained automatically by 749
applying the Neighbor-Join and BioNJ algorithms to a matrix of pairwise distances 750
estimated using a JTT model and selecting the topology with superior log likelihood 751
value. The tree is drawn to scale, with branch lengths representing the number of 752
substitutions per site. Sequence alignments of SPK1 proteins and ROP GTPases are 753
shown in Supplemental File 1 and 2, respectively. 754
755
DUAL Membrane Yeast Two-Hybrid Assays 756
The yeast strain NMY51 was transformed with the constructs in destination vectors as 757
per manufacturer’s instructions using lithium acetate transformation (Yeast Protocols 758
Handbook PT3024-1, Clontech, Palo Alto, CA, USA). The transformants were grown 759
on SD (0.67% yeast nitrogen base, 2% glucose, 2% Bacto-agar and amino acid mix) 760
without the appropriate auxotrophic markers and in the presence of 761
3-amino-1,2,4-triazole (3-AT) at different concentrations. These assays were repeated762
three times. 763
764
Luciferase Biomolecular Complementation Assays 765
cLuc-LjROP6, cLuc-LjROP6 CA, or cLuc-LjROP6 DN was co-expressed with 766
LjSPK1-DHR2-nLuc in N. benthamiana leaves via agroinfiltration along with p19, 767
which inhibits gene silencing (Voinnet et al., 2003). The transformed plants were 768
grown in a growth chamber. After 2–3 days, Luc images were captured by a CCD 769
(Tanon, Shanghai, China) after spraying the leaves with 1 mM luciferin. All images 770
were acquired using the same exposure settings. Each interaction group was validated 771
in at least three replicates, and three independent experiments were performed. 772
773
Bimolecular Fluorescence Complementation (BiFC) Assays 774
The LjSPK1 and LjROP6 BiFC construct 775
(pLjUb:LjSPK1-cVenus/pAtUb:LjROP6-nVenus) was expressed in N. benthamiana 776
leaves by agroinfiltration, along with p19. The transformed plants were grown in a 777
growth chamber, and 2-3 days later, the images were captured by laser scanning 778
confocal microscopy (TCS SP8, Leica). Leaves were immersed in 30% sucrose for 30 779
min for the plasmolysis experiment. The LjSPK1-LjROP6 BiFC construct was also 780
expressed in wild-type L. japonicus or M. truncatula sunn-1 by hairy root 781
transformation. The transgenic hairy roots were scored based on NLS-DsRed marker, 782
and inoculated with M. loti R7A/mTag or Rm1021/mCherry (OD600 ~0.01). The 783
images were analyzed at 5-7 days after inoculation. The filter sets for excitation (ex) 784
and emission (em) were as follows: Venus (ex/em, 514 nm/524–545 nm), 785
mCherry/DsRed (ex/em, 561 nm/600–630 nm) and mTag (ex/em, 405 nm/415–454 786
nm). All BiFC experiments were repeated twice, and at least five leaves or roots were 787
analyzed each time. 788
789
Subcellular Localization in L. japonicus Transformed Hairy Roots and N. 790
benthamiana Leaves 791
To determine the subcellular localization of LjSPK1 and LjROP6 in L. japonicus 792
hairy roots, the indicated constructs in A. tumefaciens strain AR1193 were expressed 793
in L. japonicus hairy roots, and the transgenic roots were inoculated by M. loti 794
R7A/mTag. The subcellular localization of the proteins was observed by laser 795
scanning confocal microscopy (TCS SP8, Leica). The filter sets for excitation (ex) 796
and emission (em) were as follows: GFP (ex/em, 488 nm/505–550 nm), 797
FM4-64/mCherry/DsRed (ex/em, 561 nm/600–630 nm) and mTag (ex/em, 405 798
nm/415–454 nm). 799
To observe the subcellular localization of LjSPK1 and LjROP6 in N. 800
benthamiana leaves, constructs in A. tumefaciens strain EHA105 were expressed in N. 801
benthamiana leaves by agroinfiltration along with p19. Agrobacterium cells were 802
grown overnight, collected, resuspended in buffer (10 mM MgCl2, 10 mM MES, pH 803
5.6, and 150 µM acetosyringone), adjusted to OD600 (about 0.4), and incubated at 804
28 °C for 2 h before infiltration. Three or four leaves were selected for injection. 805
Following injection, the plants were kept in a growth chamber under a 16 h/8 h light 806
(250 µmol/m2/s)/dark cycle. After 2-3 days, the leaves were observed by confocal 807
microscopy (Olympus FV1000 or Leica TCS SP8). Leaves were immersed in 30% 808
sucrose for 30 min for plasmolysis or FM4-64 solution for co-localization with PM. 809
The filter sets were as follows: GFP (ex/em, 488 nm/505–550 nm), YFP (ex/em, 514 810
nm/524–545 nm), FM4-64/mRFP/mCherry (ex/em, 561 nm/600–630 nm). Gray 811
values were analyzed using ImageJ. We used GFP beads (SMART, CAT.SA070001) 812
for immunoprecipitation, and GFP antibody (Abmart, CAT.M20004) and mCherry 813
antibody (AffinitY, CAT.T0090) for immunoblot analysis. These assays were 814
validated with three independent experiments. All protein subcellular localization 815
assays were repeated in at least three independent experiments. 816
817
Protein Extraction and Co-Immunoprecipitation Assays 818
Constructs in different combinations (ROP6-Myc, ROP6 CA-Myc, ROP6 DN-Myc, 819
ROP10-Myc, and SPK1-Flag) were transformed into N. benthamiana leaves by 820
agroinfiltration along with p19. The plants were grown in a growth room for 48 h 821
under a 16 h/8 h light (250 µmol/m2/s)/dark cycle. Approximately 0.3 g leaf tissue 822
was harvested, and leaf proteins were extracted with 1 ml extraction buffer (50 mM 823
TRIS-MES pH 8.0, 0.5 M sucrose, 1 mM MgCl2, 10 mM EDTA, 5 mM DTT, 1 mM 824
PMSF, protease inhibitor cocktail CompleteMini tablets). The mixture was 825
centrifuged at 10,000 × g at 4°C for 15 min, and the supernatant was collected for 826
co-immunoprecipitation assays. We used Myc beads (Abmart, CAT.M20012L) for 827
immunoprecipitation, and Flag antibody (HuiOu Biotech, CAT.HOA012FL01) and 828
Myc antibody (Abmart, CAT.M2000M) for immunoblotting. These assays were 829
validated with three independent experiments. 830
831
Guanine Nucleotide Exchange Activity Assay 832
To investigate the guanine nucleotide exchange activity of ROP6 and determine how 833
it is affected by SPK1, the constructs in destination vectors described above were 834
introduced into E. coli Rosetta cells by electroporation. The guanine nucleotide 835
exchange assay was essentially carried out as described previously, with small 836
modifications (Gu et al., 2006; Wang et al., 2017). The guanine nucleotide exchange 837
activity of ROP6 at different concentrations and the effect of SPK1 on this activity 838
were determined by monitoring fluorescence using a Varioskan Flash (Thermo 839
Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). The changes in fluorescence intensity were recorded 840
every 4 s for 600 s (ex/em 360 nm/440 nm). This assay was repeated three times. 841
842
Statistical Analyses 843
Statistical significance was calculated by two-tailed Student’s t-test (*P < 0.05, **P < 844
0.01) and error bars indicate SD. Vertical box plots were generated using GraphPad 845
Prism 6.0 software. For each box plot, the line in the box represents the median; the 846
boxes show the upper and lower quartiles; the whiskers represent the maximum and 847
minimum values. One-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s multiple comparisons test 848
was used to determine the differences. Values of P < 0.05 were considered to be 849
statistically significant. The results of statistical analyses are shown in Supplemental 850
Data Set 2. 851
852
Accession Numbers 853
Sequence data from this article can be found in the GenBank data libraries under 854
accession numbers MT701563 for LjSPK1 and the Lotus Base Gifu v1.2 855
(https://lotus.au.dk/) for LotjaGi3g1v0299000. The LjROP GTPase sequences can be 856
found in miyakogusa.jp V3.0 (http://www.kazusa.or.jp/lotus/) under the following 857
accession numbers: LjROP1 (Lj1g3v3331690), LjROP3 (Lj2g3v1670990), LjROP5 858
(Lj3g3v3453430), LjROP6 (Lj0g3v0167719), and LjROP10 (Lj1g3v0415230). 859
860
Supplemental Data 861
Supplemental Figure 1. Phylogenetic Analysis of DOCK family GEF Proteins and 862
Growth phenotypes of Ljspk1 Mutants. 863
Supplemental Figure 2. Symbiotic Phenotypes of Wild Type (Gifu) and Ljspk1 864
Mutants. 865
Supplemental Figure 3. Interaction between LjSPK1 and L. japonicus ROP GTPases 866
in Yeast Cells, and the Transcription Levels and Infection Events of Ljrop Mutants. 867
Supplemental Figure 4. LjROP6 Transcript Levels and Nodulation Phenotypes of 868
Ljrop6 Mutants. 869
Supplemental Figure 5. Root Hair Phenotypes of Ljrop6-2 and Ljrop6-3 Mutants. 870
Supplemental Figure 6. LjROP6 Protein Subcellular Localization in N. benthamiana 871
Epidermal Leaf Cells and Wild-type L. japonicus Hairy Roots. 872
Supplemental Figure 7. LjSPK1 Subcellular Localization in Ljrop6-1 and BiFC 873
Assay of LjSPK1 and LjROP6 interactions in L. japonicus Wild-type and Mtsunn-1 874
Hairy Roots. 875
Supplemental Figure 8. Root Hairs Growth and Rhizobial Infection in 876
LjROP6-Overexpression, LjROP6 CA, and LjROP6 DN Lines. 877
Supplemental Figure 9. Root Hair Phenotypes of LjROP1/3-Overexpression, CA, 878
and DN Lines. 879
Supplemental Figure 10. Actin Filaments Are Disordered in Ljrop6-1 Root Hairs 880
Compared with Wild Type. 881
Supplemental Figure 11. A Proposed Model of LjSPK1-LjROP Function in 882
Rhizobial Infection Thread Formation and Polarized Growth of Root Hairs. 883
Supplemental Table 1. Constructs used in this study. 884
Supplemental Data Set 1. Primers used in this study 885
Supplemental Data Set 2. ANOVA and Student’s t-test Results for the Data Shown 886
in the Figures. 887
Supplemental File 1. Sequence Alignment of SPK1 Proteins. 888
Supplemental File 2. Sequence Alignment of ROP GTPase Proteins. 889
890
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 891
We thank Prof. Phil Pool (U. Oxford, UK) for kindly providing us with the M. loti 892
R7A/mTag strain, Prof. Jeremy Murray (CEMPS, CAS, China) for sharing the 893
Golden Gate vectors, and Dr. Yoji (PSB, CAS, China) and Dr. Zhao Liu (Hebei U. of 894
Chinese Medicine) for suggestions about GEF enzyme activity. We thank Yongfei 895
Wang (CEMPS, CAS, China) for helpful discussions on this study. This work was 896
funded by grants from The National Key R & D Program of China 897
(2016YFA0500500), The Strategic Priority Research Program of Chinese Academy 898
of Sciences (XDB27040208), and The International Partnership Program of CAS 899
(153D31KYSB20160074). 900
901
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS 902
J. Liu and F. Xie designed the experiments, J. Liu performed most of the experiments,903
M.X. Liu and L. P. Qiu isolated the rop6-1 and spk1-1 mutants, respectively. J. Liu904
and F. Xie analyzed the data and wrote the manuscript. 905
906
REFERENCES 907
Akamatsu, A., H. L. Wong, M. Fujiwara, J. Okuda, K. Nishide, K. Uno, K. Imai, 908
K. Umemura, T. Kawasaki, Y. Kawano and K. Shimamoto (2013). An909
OsCEBiP/OsCERK1-OsRacGEF1-OsRac1 module is an essential early910
component of chitin-induced rice immunity. Cell Host Microbe 13: 465-476.911
Arrighi, J. F., O. Godfroy, F. de Billy, O. Saurat, A. Jauneau and C. Gough 912
(2008). The RPG gene of Medicago truncatula controls Rhizobium-directed 913
polar growth during infection. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105: 9817-9822. 914
Blanco F. A., Meschini E.P., Zanetti M. E., and O.M. Aguilar (2009). A small 915
GTPase of the Rab family is required for root hair formation and preinfection 916
stages of the common bean-Rhizobium symbiotic association. Plant Cell 917
21:2797-2810. 918
Basu, D., J. Le, T. Zakharova, E. L. Mallery and D. B. Szymanski (2008). A 919
SPIKE1 signaling complex controls actin-dependent cell morphogenesis 920
through the heteromeric WAVE and ARP2/3 complexes. Proc Natl Acad Sci 921
U S A 105: 4044-4049. 922
Brewin, N. J. (2004). Plant cell wall remodelling in the rhizobium–legume symbiosis. 923
Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 23: 293-316. 924
Craddock, C., I. Lavagi and Z. Yang (2012). New insights into Rho signaling from 925
plant ROP/Rac GTPases. Trends Cell Biol 22: 492-501. 926
Craddock, C. and Z. Yang (2012). Endocytic signaling in leaves and roots: same 927
rules different players. Front Plant Sci 3: 219. 928
Cullimore, J. V., R. Ranjeva and J. J. Bono (2001). Perception of 929
lipo-chitooligosaccharidic Nod factors in legumes. Trends Plant Sci 6: 24-30. 930
Dalla Via, V., Traubenik, S., Rivero, C., Aguilar O.M., Zanetti M.E., and F. A. 931
Blanco (2017). The monomeric GTPase RabA2 is required for progression 932
and maintenance of membrane integrity of infection threads during root 933
nodule symbiosis. Plant Mol Biol 93, 549–562. 934
Downie, J. A. and S. A. Walker (1999). Plant responses to nodulation factors. Curr 935
Opin Plant Biol 2: 483-489. 936
Ehrhardt, D. W., E. M. Atkinson and S. R. Long (1992). Depolarization of alfalfa 937
root hair membrane potential by Rhizobium meliloti Nod factors. Science 256: 938
998-1000.939
Eklund, D. M., E. M. Svensson and B. Kost (2010). Physcomitrella patens: a model 940
to investigate the role of RAC/ROP GTPase signalling in tip growth. J Exp 941
Bot 61: 1917-1937. 942
Endler, A. and S. Persson (2011). Cellulose synthases and synthesis in Arabidopsis. 943
Mol Plant 4: 199-211. 944
Esseling, J. J., Franck G.P. Lhuissier and Anne Mie C. Emons (2003). Nod 945
factor-induced root hair curling: continuous polar growth towards the point of 946
Nod factor application. Plant Physiology 132: 1982-1988. 947
Feiguelman, G., Y. Fu and S. Yalovsky (2018). ROP GTPases structure-function 948
and signaling pathways. Plant Physiol 176: 57-79. 949
Fournier, J., A. Teillet, M. Chabaud, S. Ivanov, A. Genre, E. Limpens, F. de 950
Carvalho-Niebel and D. G. Barker (2015). Remodeling of the infection 951
chamber before infection thread formation reveals a two-step mechanism for 952
rhizobial entry into the host legume root hair. Plant Physiol 167: 1233-1242. 953
Fournier, J., A. C. Timmers, B. J. Sieberer, A. Jauneau, M. Chabaud and D. G. 954
Barker (2008). Mechanism of infection thread elongation in root hairs of 955
Medicago truncatula and dynamic interplay with associated rhizobial 956
colonization. Plant Physiol 148: 1985-1995. 957
Fu, Y., H. Li and Z. Yang (2002). The ROP2 GTPase controls the formation of 958
cortical fine F-actin and the early phase of directional cell expansion during 959
Arabidopsis organogenesis. Plant Cell 14: 777-794. 960
Fu, Y., Y. Gu, Z. Zheng, G. Wasteneys and Z. Yang (2005). Arabidopsis 961
interdigitating cell growth requires two antagonistic pathways with opposing 962
action on cell morphogenesis. Cell 120: 687-700. 963
Fukai, E., T. Soyano, Y. Umehara, S. Nakayama, H. Hirakawa, S. Tabata, S. 964
Sato and M. Hayashi (2012). Establishment of a Lotus japonicus gene 965
tagging population using the exon-targeting endogenous retrotransposon 966
LORE1. Plant J 69: 720-730. 967
Gavrin, A., V. Jansen, S. Ivanov, T. Bisseling and E. Fedorova (2015). 968
ARP2/3-mediated actin nucleation associated with symbiosome membrane is 969
essential for the development of symbiosomes in infected cells of Medicago 970
truncatula root nodules. Mol Plant Microbe Interact 28: 605-614. 971
Gu, Y., S. Li, E. M. Lord and Z. Yang (2006). Members of a novel class of 972
Arabidopsis Rho guanine nucleotide exchange factors control Rho 973
GTPase-dependent polar growth. Plant Cell 18: 366-381. 974
Hazak, O., D. Bloch, L. Poraty, H. Sternberg, J. Zhang, J. Friml and S. Yalovsky 975
(2010). A Rho scaffold integrates the secretory system with feedback 976
mechanisms in regulation of auxin distribution. PLoS Biol 8: e1000282. 977
Hossain, M. S., J. Liao, E. K. James, S. Sato, S. Tabata, A. Jurkiewicz, L. H. 978
Madsen, J. Stougaard, L. Ross and K. Szczyglowski (2012). Lotus 979
japonicus ARPC1 is required for rhizobial infection. Plant Physiol 160: 980
917-928. 981
Jones, K. M., H. Kobayashi, B. W. Davies, M. E. Taga and G. C. Walker (2007). 982
How rhizobial symbionts invade plants: the Sinorhizobium-Medicago model. 983
Nat Rev Microbiol 5: 619-633. 984
Jones, M. A., J. J. Shen, Y. Fu, H. Li, Z. Yang and C. S. Grierson (2002). The 985
Arabidopsis Rop2 GTPase is a positive regulator of both root hair initiation 986
and tip growth. Plant Cell 14: 763-776. 987
Ke, D., Q. Fang, C. Chen, H. Zhu, T. Chen, X. Chang, S. Yuan, H. Kang, L. Ma, 988
Z. Hong and Z. Zhang (2012). The small GTPase ROP6 interacts with NFR5 989
and is involved in nodule formation in Lotus japonicus. Plant Physiol 159: 990
131-143. 991
Kiss, E., B. Olah, P. Kalo, M. Morales, A. B. Heckmann, A. Borbola, A. Lozsa, K. 992
Kontar, P. Middleton, J. A. Downie, G. E. Oldroyd and G. Endre (2009). 993
LIN, a novel type of U-box/WD40 protein, controls early infection by rhizobia 994
in legumes. Plant Physiol 151: 1239-1249. 995
Kiirika, L. M., H. F. Bergmann, C. Schikowsky, D. Wimmer, J. Korte, U. 996
Schmitz, K. Niehaus and F. Colditz (2012). Silencing of the Rac1 GTPase 997
MtROP9 in Medicago truncatula stimulates early mycorrhizal and oomycete 998
root colonizations but negatively affects rhizobial infection. Plant Physiol 159: 999
501-516. 1000
Kost B., E. Lemichez, P. Spielhofer, Y. Hong, K. Tolias, C. Carpenter and N. 1001
Chua (1999). Rac homologues and compartmentalized phosphatidylinositol 4, 1002
5-bisphosphate act in a common pathway to regulate polar pollen tube growth. 1003
J Cell Biol, 145: 317-330. 1004
Kost B. (2008). Spatial control of Rho (Rac-Rop) signaling in tip-growing plant cells. 1005
Trends Cell Biol 18: 119-27. 1006
Lavy, M., D. Bloch, O. Hazak, I. Gutman, L. Poraty, N. Sorek, H. Sternberg and 1007
S. Yalovsky (2007). A Novel ROP/RAC effector links cell polarity, 1008
root-meristem maintenance, and vesicle trafficking. Curr Biol 17: 947-952. 1009
Lei, M. J., Q. Wang, X. Li, A. Chen, L. Luo, Y. Xie, G. Li, D. Luo, K. S. Mysore, 1010
J. Wen, Z. P. Xie, C. Staehelin and Y. Z. Wang (2015). The small GTPase 1011
ROP10 of Medicago truncatula is required for both tip growth of root hairs 1012
and nod factor-induced root hair deformation. Plant Cell 27: 806-822. 1013
Li H., Y. L., Rachel M. Heath, Michael X. Zhu and Zhenbiao Yang (1999). 1014
Control of pollen tube tip growth by a Rop GTPase–dependent pathway that 1015
leads to tip-localized calcium influx. Plant Cell 11: 1731-1742. 1016
Li, X., Z. Zheng, X. Kong, J. Xu, L. Qiu, J. Sun, D. Reid, H. Jin, S. U. Andersen, 1017
G. E. D. Oldroyd, J. Stougaard, J. A. Downie and F. Xie (2019). Atypical 1018
receptor kinase RINRK1 required for rhizobial infection but not nodule 1019
development in Lotus japonicus. Plant Physiol 181: 804-816. 1020
Liao, H., R. Tang, X. Zhang, S. Luan and F. Yu (2017). FERONIA receptor kinase 1021
at the crossroads of hormone signaling and stress responses. Plant Cell Physiol 1022
58: 1143-1150. 1023
Lin, D., S. Nagawa, J. Chen, L. Cao, X. Chen, T. Xu, H. Li, P. Dhonukshe, C. 1024
Yamamuro, J. Friml, B. Scheres, Y. Fu and Z. Yang (2012). A ROP 1025
GTPase-dependent auxin signaling pathway regulates the subcellular 1026
distribution of PIN2 in Arabidopsis roots. Curr Biol 22: 1319-1325. 1027
Lin Y., Y. Wang, J. Zhu and Z. Yang (1996). Localization of a Rho GTPase implies 1028
a role in tip growth and movement of the generative cell in pollen tubes. Plant 1029
Cell 8: 293-303. 1030
Liu, C. W., A. Breakspear, D. Guan, M. R. Cerri, K. Jackson, S. Jiang, F. 1031
Robson, G. V. Radhakrishnan, S. Roy, C. Bone, N. Stacey, C. Rogers, M. 1032
Trick, A. Niebel, G. E. D. Oldroyd, F. de Carvalho-Niebel and J. D. 1033
Murray (2019a). NIN acts as a network hub controlling a growth module 1034
required for rhizobial infection. Plant Physiol 179: 1704-1722. 1035
Liu, C. W., A. Breakspear, N. Stacey, K. Findlay, J. Nakashima, K. 1036
Ramakrishnan, M. Liu, F. Xie, G. Endre, F. de Carvalho-Niebel, G. E. D. 1037
Oldroyd, M. K. Udvardi, J. Fournier and J. D. Murray (2019b). A protein 1038
complex required for polar growth of rhizobial infection threads. Nat Commun 1039
10: 2848. 1040
Maekawa, T., M. Kusakabe, Y. Shimoda, S. Sato, S. Tabata, Y. Murooka and M. 1041
Hayashi (2008). Polyubiquitin promoter-based binary vectors for 1042
overexpression and gene silencing in Lotus japonicus. Mol Plant Microbe 1043
Interact 21: 375-382. 1044
Meller, N., S. Merlot and C. Guda (2005). CZH proteins: a new family of 1045
Rho-GEFs. J Cell Sci 118: 4937-4946. 1046
Miyahara, A., J. Richens, C. Starker, G. Morieri, L. Smith, S. Long, J. A. 1047
Downie and G. E. Oldroyd (2010). Conservation in function of a 1048
SCAR/WAVE component during infection thread and root hair growth in 1049
Medicago truncatula. Mol Plant Microbe Interact 23: 1553-1562. 1050
Miyamoto, Y., T. Torii, N. Yamamori, T. Ogata, A. Tanoue and J. Yamauchi 1051
(2013). Akt and PP2A reciprocally regulate the guanine nucleotide exchange 1052
factor Dock6 to control axon growth of sensory neurons. Sci Signal 6:ra15. 1053
Molendijk, A. J., F. Bischoff, C. S. Rajendrakumar, J. Friml, M. Braun, S. 1054
Gilroy and K. Palme (2001). Arabidopsis thaliana Rop GTPases are 1055
localized to tips of root hairs and control polar growth. EMBO J 20: 1056
2779-2788. 1057
Murray, J. D. (2011). Invasion by invitation: rhizobial infection in legumes. Mol 1058
Plant Microbe Interact 24: 631-639. 1059
Murray, J. D., B. J. Karas, S. Sato, S. Tabata, L. Amyot and K. Szczyglowski 1060
(2007). A cytokinin perception mutant colonized by Rhizobium in the absence 1061
of nodule organogenesis. Science 315: 101-104. 1062
Murray, J. D., R. R. Muni, I. Torres-Jerez, Y. Tang, S. Allen, M. Andriankaja, G. 1063
Li, A. Laxmi, X. Cheng, J. Wen, D. Vaughan, M. Schultze, J. Sun, M. 1064
Charpentier, G. Oldroyd, M. Tadege, P. Ratet, K. S. Mysore, R. Chen and 1065
M. K. Udvardi (2011). Vapyrin, a gene essential for intracellular progression1066
of arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis, is also essential for infection by rhizobia1067
in the nodule symbiosis of Medicago truncatula. Plant J 65: 244-252.1068
Oda, Y. and H. Fukuda (2012). Initiation of cell wall pattern by a Rho- and 1069
microtubule-driven symmetry breaking. Science 337: 1333-1336. 1070
Oldroyd, G. E. (2013). Speak, friend, and enter: signalling systems that promote 1071
beneficial symbiotic associations in plants. Nat Rev Microbiol 11: 252-263. 1072
Oldroyd, G. E. and J. A. Downie (2008). Coordinating nodule morphogenesis with 1073
rhizobial infection in legumes. Annu Rev Plant Biol 59: 519-46. 1074
Qiu, J. L., R. Jilk, M. D. Marks and D. B. Szymanski (2002). The Arabidopsis 1075
SPIKE1 gene is required for normal cell shape control and tissue development. 1076
Plant Cell 14: 101-118. 1077
Qiu, L., J. S. Lin, J. Xu, S. Sato, M. Parniske, T. L. Wang, J. A. Downie and F. 1078
Xie (2015). SCARN a novel class of SCAR protein that is required for 1079
root-hair infection during legume nodulation. PLoS Genet 11: e1005623. 1080
Riely, B. K., H. He, M. Venkateshwaran, B. Sarma, J. Schraiber, J. M. Ane and 1081
D. R. Cook (2011). Identification of legume RopGEF gene families and1082
characterization of a Medicago truncatula RopGEF mediating polar growth of1083
root hairs. Plant J 65: 230-243.1084
Rose, C. M., M. Venkateshwaran, J. D. Volkening, P. A. Grimsrud, J. Maeda, D. 1085
J. Bailey, K. Park, M. Howes-Podoll, D. den Os, L. H. Yeun, M. S.1086
Westphall, M. R. Sussman, J. M. Ane and J. J. Coon (2012). Rapid1087
phosphoproteomic and transcriptomic changes in the rhizobia-legume1088
symbiosis. Mol Cell Proteomics 11: 724-744.1089
Roy, S., W. Liu, R. S. Nandety, A. D. Crook, K. S. Mysore, C. I. Pislariu, J. A. 1090
Frugoli, R. Dickstein and M. K. Udvardi (2020). Celebrating 20 years of 1091
genetic discoveries in legume nodulation and symbiotic nitrogen fixation. 1092
Plant Cell 32: 15-41. 1093
Samaj, J., J. Muller, M. Beck, N. Bohm and D. Menzel (2006). Vesicular 1094
trafficking, cytoskeleton and signalling in root hairs and pollen tubes. Trends 1095
Plant Sci 11: 594-600. 1096
Schmutz, J., S. B. Cannon, J. Schlueter, J. Ma, T. Mitros, W. Nelson, D. L. Hyten, 1097
Q. Song, J. J. Thelen, J. Cheng, D. Xu, U. Hellsten, G. D. May, Y. Yu, T.1098
Sakurai, T. Umezawa, M. K. Bhattacharyya, D. Sandhu, B. Valliyodan, E.1099
Lindquist, M. Peto, D. Grant, S. Shu, D. Goodstein, K. Barry, M.1100
Futrell-Griggs, B. Abernathy, J. Du, Z. Tian, L. Zhu, N. Gill, T. Joshi, M.1101
Libault, A. Sethuraman, X. C. Zhang, K. Shinozaki, H. T. Nguyen, R. A.1102
Wing, P. Cregan, J. Specht, J. Grimwood, D. Rokhsar, G. Stacey, R. C.1103
Shoemaker and S. A. Jackson (2010). Genome sequence of the1104
palaeopolyploid soybean. Nature 463: 178-183.1105
Sinharoy, S., C. Liu, A. Breakspear, D. Guan, S. Shailes, J. Nakashima, S. Zhang, 1106
J. Wen, I. Torres-Jerez, G. Oldroyd, J. D. Murray and M. K. Udvardi1107
(2016). A Medicago truncatula cystathionine-beta-synthase-like1108
domain-containing protein is required for rhizobial infection and symbiotic1109
nitrogen fixation. Plant Physiol 170: 2204-2217.1110
Sorek, N., O. Gutman, E. Bar, M. Abu-Abied, X. Feng, M. P. Running, E. 1111
Lewinsohn, N. Ori, E. Sadot, Y. I. Henis and S. Yalovsky (2011). 1112
Differential effects of prenylation and s-acylation on type I and II ROPS 1113
membrane interaction and function. Plant Physiol 155: 706-720. 1114
Suzaki, T., M. Ito, E. Yoro, S. Sato, H. Hirakawa, N. Takeda and M. Kawaguchi 1115
(2014). Endoreduplication-mediated initiation of symbiotic organ 1116
development in Lotus japonicus. Development 141: 2441-2445. 1117
Timmers, A. C., M. C. Auriac and G. Truchet (1999). Refined analysis of early 1118
symbiotic steps of the Rhizobium-Medicago interaction in relationship with 1119
microtubular cytoskeleton rearrangements. Development 126: 3617-3628. 1120
Tominaga, M. and K. Ito (2015). The molecular mechanism and physiological role 1121
of cytoplasmic streaming. Curr Opin Plant Biol 27: 104-110. 1122
Urbanski, D. F., A. Malolepszy, J. Stougaard and S. U. Andersen (2012). 1123
Genome-wide LORE1 retrotransposon mutagenesis and high-throughput 1124
insertion detection in Lotus japonicus. Plant J 69: 731-741. 1125
Voinnet, O., S. Rivas, P. Mestre and D. Baulcombe (2003). An enhanced transient 1126
expression system in plants based on suppression of gene silencing by the p19 1127
protein of tomato bushy stunt virus. Plant J 33: 949-956. 1128
Wang, C., M. Zhu, L. Duan, H. Yu, X. Chang, L. Li, H. Kang, Y. Feng, H. Zhu, 1129
Z. Hong and Z. Zhang (2015). Lotus japonicus clathrin heavy Chain1 is 1130
associated with Rho-Like GTPase ROP6 and involved in nodule formation. 1131
Plant Physiol 167: 1497-1510. 1132
Wang, Q., M. Lei, A. Chen, R. Wang, G. Li and Y. Wang (2014). MtROP8 is 1133
involved in root hair development and the establishment of symbiotic 1134
interaction between Medicago truncatula and Sinorhizobium meliloti. Chinese 1135
Science Bulletin 59: 4289-4297. 1136
Wang, Q., Y. Li, K. Ishikawa, K. I. Kosami, K. Uno, S. Nagawa, L. Tan, J. Du, K. 1137
Shimamoto and Y. Kawano (2018). Resistance protein Pit interacts with the 1138
GEF OsSPK1 to activate OsRac1 and trigger rice immunity. Proc Natl Acad 1139
Sci U S A 115: E11551-E11560. 1140
Wang, W., Z. Liu, L. J. Bao, S. S. Zhang, C. G. Zhang, X. Li, H. X. Li, X. L. 1141
Zhang, A. M. Bones, Z. B. Yang and Y. L. Chen (2017). The 1142
RopGEF2-ROP7/ROP2 pathway activated by phyB suppresses red 1143
light-induced stomatal opening. Plant Physiol 174: 717-731. 1144
Xie, F., J. D. Murray, J. Kim, A. B. Heckmann, A. Edwards, G. E. Oldroyd and J. 1145
A. Downie (2012). Legume pectate lyase required for root infection by 1146
rhizobia. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109: 633-638. 1147
Yang, Z. (2002). Small GTPases: versatile signaling switches in plants. Plant Cell 14: 1148
Suppl, S375-S388. 1149
Yano, K., S. Shibata, W. L. Chen, S. Sato, T. Kaneko, A. Jurkiewicz, N. Sandal, 1150
M. Banba, H. Imaizumi-Anraku, T. Kojima, R. Ohtomo, K. Szczyglowski, 1151
J. Stougaard, S. Tabata, M. Hayashi, H. Kouchi and Y. Umehara (2009). 1152
CERBERUS, a novel U-box protein containing WD-40 repeats, is required for 1153
formation of the infection thread and nodule development in the 1154
legume-Rhizobium symbiosis. Plant J 60: 168-180. 1155
Yokota, K., E. Fukai, L. H. Madsen, A. Jurkiewicz, P. Rueda, S. Radutoiu, M. 1156
Held, M. S. Hossain, K. Szczyglowski, G. Morieri, G. E. Oldroyd, J. A. 1157
Downie, M. W. Nielsen, A. M. Rusek, S. Sato, S. Tabata, E. K. James, H. 1158
Oyaizu, N. Sandal and J. Stougaard (2009). Rearrangement of actin 1159
cytoskeleton mediates invasion of Lotus japonicus roots by Mesorhizobium 1160
loti. Plant Cell 21: 267-284. 1161
Yoon, H. J., M. S. Hossain, M. Held, H. Hou, M. Kehl, A. Tromas, S. Sato, S. 1162
Tabata, S. U. Andersen, J. Stougaard, L. Ross and K. Szczyglowski (2014). 1163
Lotus japonicus SUNERGOS1 encodes a predicted subunit A of a DNA 1164
topoisomerase VI that is required for nodule differentiation and 1165
accommodation of rhizobial infection. Plant J 78: 811-821. 1166
Zhang, C., S. O. Kotchoni, A. L. Samuels and D. B. Szymanski (2010). SPIKE1 1167
signals originate from and assemble specialized domains of the endoplasmic 1168
reticulum. Curr Biol 20: 2144-2149. 1169
Zheng, Z. L. and Z. B. Yang (2000). The Rop GTPase switch turns on polar growth 1170
in pollen. Trends Plant Sci 5: 298-303. 1171
Figure 1. LjSPK1 Is Induced by Nod Factors and Is Specifically Expressed in Young Nodules. (A) RT-qPCR analysis of LjSPK1 transcript levels in roots of wild-type L. japonicus (Gifu) after inoculationwith purified Nod factor (0 h, 6 h, 12 h). Expression is relative to that in mock-treated samples (0 h) andnormalized to that of Lotus Ubiquitin. Mean and SD were derived from two biological replicates. Statisticalsignificance (*P < 0.05) was evaluated by Student’s t test.(B–C) pLjSPK1:GUS expression pattern in wild-type roots without rhizobial inoculation.(D–H) pLjSPK1:GUS expression pattern in wild-type roots after inoculation with M. loti R7A expressing lacZ.GUS activity was detected in nodule primordia and young nodules (D–G), and in vascular bundles ofmature nodules (H).(I–K) Section of nodules showing that pLjSPK1:GUS expression in all cell layers in young nodules (I and J),but not in mature nodules nitrogen-fixation zone (K).Transgenic roots were co-stained with X-Gluc and Magenta-Gal to visualize pLjSPK1:GUS expression (inblue) and M. loti (in purple), respectively. Bars=100 μm in (B–H) and 1 mm in (I–K).
Figure 2. Infection Threads in Ljspk1 Mutants Are Abnormal Compared with Wild-type L. japonicus. (A–D) Normal elongating infection threads in the wild type (Gifu) (A) and typical abnormal infection events in the Ljspk1 mutants (B and C) at 1 week after inoculation with M. loti R7A/GFP. Roots were counterstained with propidium iodide before observation. Green fluorescence shows normal infection foci and a normal infection thread in a curled root hair in the wild type, whereas Ljspk1 mutants show abnormal infection processes, such as sac-like or looped ITs (B and C). Bars=10 μm. (D) A cartoon diagram of the infection events. Abbreviations: foci, infection foci; IT, infection thread in an epidermis cell; rIT, infection thread extending into a cortex cell; abnormal, abnormal IT in root hairs. (E–F) Boxplots representing the number of infection events in wild type, Ljspk1 siblings, and Ljspk1 mutants. Total number of infection events per plant (E) and number of infection events per centimeter root (F) were scored at 1 week after inoculation with M. loti R7A/lacZ. Asterisks indicate a significant difference(* for P<0.05, ** for P<0.01, Student’s t-test, comparison between wild type and mutants).(G–I) Infection thread phenotypes (G) and infection events (H–I) in wild-type L. japonicus hairy rootsexpressing control plasmid (EV), LjSPK1-Ri, or LjSPK1-OX. Total number of infection events per plant (H)and number of infection events per centimeter root (I) scored 1 week after inoculation with M. loti R7A/lacZ.Abnormal infection events are enlarged in the inset (H–I). Asterisks indicate a significant difference (* forP<0.05, ** for P<0.01, Student’s t-test, comparison between EV control and experimental group). Bars=50μm.For each boxplot: the center lines in box show the median; the box limits are the upper and lower quartiles;
the whiskers represent the maximum value and minimum value.
Figure 3. Root Hair and Infection Thread Phenotypes of Ljrop Mutants. (A) Light micrographs of root hairs in wild type (Gifu) and Ljrop mutants at 2 days after germination. Thenumbers in the lower left corners shows the number of plants with the type of root hair shown in the imageout of the total number of plants observed. Bars=100 μm.(B) Light micrograph of M. loti R7A-induced root hair deformation in the infection zone of wild type and Ljropmutants at 18 h after M. loti R7A inoculation. Bars= 100 μm.A–B: Insets (bottom) are enlargements of the areas in red boxes (top).(C–F) Infection thread phenotypes of wild type (C) and Ljrop mutants (D–F) at 5 days after inoculation withM. loti R7A/LacZ. Bars=50 μm.(G) Boxplot representing the number of infection events on roots of wild type and Ljrop mutant roots at 5days after inoculation with M. loti R7A/lacZ. The center lines in box show the median; the box limits are theupper and lower quartiles; the whiskers represent the maximum value and minimum value. Asterisksindicate a significant difference (** for P<0.01, Student’s t-test, comparison between wild type and Ljropmutants).
Figure 4. Disorientated Infection Thread Phenotypes of Ljrop6 Mutants and Complementation of Infection Thread Phenotype via Hairy Root Transformation of Ljrop6-1. (A–E) Normal infection thread phenotypes of the wild type (A) and typical misdirected infection events in all three Ljrop6 mutants (B–D). Bars=50 μm. (E) A cartoon diagram of the misdirected infection threads. Misdirected indicates misdirected or looped IT in root hairs or epidermis cell. (F–G) Boxplots representing the number of infection events in wild-type L. japonicus (Gifu) and Ljrop6 mutants at 5 days after inoculation with M. loti R7A/lacZ. Misdirected infection events are enlarged in the inset. Asterisks indicate a significant difference (* for P<0.05, ** for P<0.01, Student’s t-test, comparison between wild type and Ljrop6 mutants). (H–I) Infection thread phenotype (H) and infection events (I) of Ljrop6-1 hairy roots expressing control plasmid (EV) and pLjROP6:LjROP6-mCherry. Infection threads were stained with X-Gal and scored 5 days after inoculation with M. loti R7A/lacZ. Misdirected infection events are enlarged in the inset. Asterisks indicate a significant difference (* for P<0.05, ** for P<0.01, Student’s t-test, comparison between EV and LjROP6). Bars=50 μm. For each boxplot: the center lines in box show the median; the box limits are the upper and lower quartiles; the whiskers represent the maximum value and minimum value.
Figure 5. LjSPK1 Physically Interacts with LjROP6 and Activates its GTPase Activity in Vitro. (A) Luciferase biomolecular complementation assays showing the interaction between LjSPK1-DHR2 andLjROP6, LjROP6 CA, or LjROP6 DN in N. benthamiana leaf cells. The indicated constructs were transientlyco-expressed in N. benthamiana leaves, and luciferase complementation imaging was captured 2 daysafter agroinfiltration. nLuc, N-terminal fragment of firefly luciferase; cLuc, C-terminal fragment of fireflyluciferase. Fluorescence signal intensity is indicated.(B) Co-immunoprecipitation assay showing the interaction between LjSPK1-DHR2 and LjROP6 in N.benthamiana leaves. The indicated constructs were co-expressed in N. benthamiana leaves. The Co-IPassay was performed using anti-Myc antibody, and the proteins were detected by immunoblot analysis withanti-Flag and anti-Myc antibodies. LjSPK1-DHR2 interacted more strongly with LjROP6 DN than withLjROP6 CA. No interaction was detected between LjSPK1-DHR2 and LjROP10, a type II ROP GTPase.(C) Time course of intrinsic nucleotide exchange in LjROP6. The intrinsic guanine nucleotide exchangerates of LjROP6 increased with increasing reaction time and increasing concentration of LjROP6. Theassays contained 1 μM mant-GTP and the indicated concentration of GDP-LjROP6.(D) LjSPK1-DHR2 shows concentration-dependent GEF activity toward LjROP6. The assays contained 1μM mant-GTP, 0.5 μM GDP-LjROP6, and the indicated concentrations of LjSPK1-DHR2.Results are a representative of three independent assays with similar results.
Figure 6. Subcellular Localization of LjSPK1 in N. benthamiana Leaves and Wild-Type L. japonicus Hairy Roots. (A–F) Confocal images of LjSPK1-YFP expressed in N. benthamiana leaf cells. (A–B) Subcellular localization of LjSPK1-YFP in N. benthamiana leaves (A) and after plasmolysis via 30% sucrose treatment (B). (C) LjSPK1-YFP (green) expressed in N. benthamiana leaves and stained with the PM marker FM4-64 dye (magenta), showing that SPK1 does not merge with the PM marker. (D) LjSPK1-YFP (green) and ER marker HDEL-mRFP (magenta) were co-expressed in N. benthamiana leaves. Image shows merging of LjSPK1-YFP and HDEL-mRFP fluorescence. These genes were driven by the CaMV 35S promoter. (E–F) Intensity profiles of LjSPK1 and FM4-64 or HDEL-mRFP. Plots show fluorescence intensities of LjSPK1-YFP (green) and FM4-64 or HDEL-mRFP (magenta) in regions of interest (insets in Figure 6C–D). C–D: Insets (bottom) are enlargements of the areas in white boxes (top). Bars=10 μm. (G–J) Live cell confocal images of LjSPK1-eGFP expressed in root hairs before (G and H) and after (I and J) M. loti R7A/mTag inoculation in wild-type L. japonicus hairy roots. (G) LjSPK1-eGFP (green) fluorescencewas detected in L. japonicus hairy roots in the plasma membrane and puncta in the vicinity of the nucleus.NLS-DsRed (magenta; nuclear marker) was used as a transgenic marker. (H) LjSPK1-eGFP (green) wasdetected in L. japonicus hairy roots PM and stained with the PM marker FM4-64 dye (magenta). (I–J)LjSPK1-eGFP (green) in the PM of curled root hair (I) or with elongated IT (J) after M. loti R7A/mTaginoculaiton. IT is indicated by M. loti R7A/mTag (cyan). Asterisks indicate GFP fluorescence. Expression ofLjSPK1 was driven by the L. japonicus Ubiquitin gene promoter. Insets (right) are enlargements of the areasin white boxes (left). Bars=10 μm.
Figure 7. LjROP6 Co-localizes and Interacts with LjSPK1 at the Plasma Membrane in N. benthamiana Leaves and Hairy Roots in Legumes. (A–C) LjSPK1-YFP (green) and LjROP6-mCherry (magenta) were co-expressed in N. benthamiana leaves, showing that LjROP6 promotes LjSPK1 distribution in the plasma membrane (A). Insets (bottom) are enlargements of the areas in white boxes (top). (B) Intensity profiles of LjSPK1-YFP and LjROP6-mCherry. Plots show fluorescence intensities of LjSPK1-YFP (green) and LjROP6-mCherry (magenta) in regions of interest (insets in Figure 7A). (C) Immunoblots showing protein levels of LjSPK1 and LjROP6 in N. benthamiana leaves. Total protein was extracted and analyzed by immunoblotting with anti-GFP and anti-mCherry antibodies. Rubisco was used as the loading control. Bars=10 μm. (D–E) Bimolecular fluorescence complementation (BiFC) assay of LjSPK1-cVenus and LjROP6-nVenus expressed in N. benthamiana leaves, before (D) and after (E) plasmolysis with 30% sucrose treatment. Split Venus fluorescent was detected in the plasma membrane. Bars=10 μm. (F–H) BiFC assay of LjSPK1-cVenus and LjROP6-nVenus in wild-type L. japonicus hairy roots (F) or M. truncatula sunn-1 hairy roots (G) 5 days after rhizobial inoculation. Asterisks represent the Venus fluorescence and indicate that LjROP6 interacts with LjSPK1 in the root hair plasma membrane (F) or infection foci (G). Cyan and magenta fluorescence represent M. loti R7A/mTag (cyan, F) or Sm1021/mCherry (magenta, G), respectively. Insets (right) are enlargements of the areas in white boxes (left). Bars=10 μm.
DOI 10.1105/tpc.20.00109; originally published online October 6, 2020;Plant Cell
Jing Liu, Miaoxia Liu, Liping Qiu and Fang XieLotus japonicus
SPIKE1 Activates the GTPase ROP6 to Guide the Polarized Growth of Infection Threads in
This information is current as of May 27, 2021
Supplemental Data /content/suppl/2020/10/09/tpc.20.00109.DC1.html
Permissions X
https://www.copyright.com/ccc/openurl.do?sid=pd_hw1532298X&issn=1532298X&WT.mc_id=pd_hw1532298
eTOCs http://www.plantcell.org/cgi/alerts/ctmain
Sign up for eTOCs at:
CiteTrack Alerts http://www.plantcell.org/cgi/alerts/ctmain
Sign up for CiteTrack Alerts at:
Subscription Information http://www.aspb.org/publications/subscriptions.cfm
is available at:Plant Physiology and The Plant CellSubscription Information for
ADVANCING THE SCIENCE OF PLANT BIOLOGY © American Society of Plant Biologists