Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- bacteria:t3e:xopq [2020/07/17 10:13]
rkoebnik [References]
+++ bacteria:t3e:xopq [2021/01/05 17:25] (current)
rkoebnik [References]
@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 === How discovered? ===
-XopQ was identified in a genetic screen, using a Tn//5//-based transposon construct harboring the coding sequence for the HR-inducing domain of AvrBs2, but devoid of the effectors' T3SS signal, that was randomly inserted into the genome of //X. campestris// pv. //vesicatoria// (//Xcv//)// //strain 85-10. The XopQ::AvrBs2 fusion protein triggered a //Bs2//-dependent hypersensitive response (HR) in pepper leaves (Roden //et al//., 2004). XopQ was also identified in //X. campestris// pv. //campestris// (//Xcc//) strain 8004 as a candidate T3E due to the presence of a plant-inducible promoter (PIP) box in its gene, XC_3177 (Jiang //et al.//, 2009).
+XopQ was identified in a genetic screen, using a Tn//5//-based transposon construct harboring the coding sequence for the HR-inducing domain of AvrBs2, but devoid of the effectors' T3SS signal, that was randomly inserted into the genome of //X. campestris// pv. //vesicatoria// (//Xcv//)strain 85-10. The XopQ::AvrBs2 fusion protein triggered a //Bs2//-dependent hypersensitive response (HR) in pepper leaves (Roden //et al//., 2004). XopQ was also identified in //X. campestris// pv. //campestris// (//Xcc//) strain 8004 as a candidate T3E due to the presence of a plant-inducible promoter (PIP) box in its gene, XC_3177 (Jiang //et al.//, 2009).
 === (Experimental) evidence for being a T3E ===
@@ Line 45: / Line 45: @@
   * Roq1 was found to confer immunity to //Xanthomonas//  (containing XopQ), //P. syringae//  (containing the XopQ homolog HopQ1), and //Ralstonia//  (containing the XopQ homolog RipB) when expressed in tomato (Thomas //et al.//, 2020).
   * Strong resistance to //Xanthomonas euvesicatoria//  pv. //perforans//  was observed with transgenic tomato plants expressing Roq1 from //N. benthamiana//  in three seasons of field trials with both natural and artificial inoculation. The Roq1 gene can therefore be used to provide safe, economical, and effective control of these pathogens in tomato and other crop species and reduce or eliminate the need for traditional chemical controls (Thomas //et al.//, 2020).
+  * Agrobacterium-mediated transient expression of both XopQ and XopX in rice cells resulted in induction of rice immune responses. These immune responses were not observed when either protein was individually expressed in rice cells. XopQ-XopX induced rice immune responses were not observed with a XopX mutant that is defective in 14-3-3 binding (Deb //et al.//, 2020).
+  * A screen for //Xanthomonas//  effectors which can suppress XopQ-XopX induced rice immune responses, led to the identification of five effectors, namely XopU, XopV, XopP, XopG and AvrBs2, that could individually suppress these immune responses. These results suggest a complex interplay of //Xanthomonas//  T3SS effectors in suppression of both pathogen-triggered immunity and effector-triggered immunity to promote virulence on rice (Deb //et al.//, 2020).
 === Localization ===
@@ Line 66: / Line 68: @@
 Roq1, a nucleotide-binding leucine-rich repeat (NLR) protein with a Toll-like interleukin-1 receptor (TIR) domain, was found to co-immunoprecipitate with XopQ, suggesting a physical association between the two proteins (Schultink //et al.//, 2017).
-XopQ<sub>Xoo</sub>  was shown to interact in yeast and in planta with two rice 14–3–3 proteins, Gf14f and Gf14g (Deb //et al//., 2019). A serine to alanine mutation (S65A) of a 14–3–3 interaction motif in XopQ abolished the ability of XopQ to interact with the two 14–3–3 proteins and to suppress innate immunity.
+XopQ<sub>Xoo</sub>  was shown to interact in yeast and i//n planta//  with two rice 14–3–3 proteins, Gf14f and Gf14g (Deb //et al//., 2019). A serine to alanine mutation (S65A) of a 14–3–3 interaction motif in XopQ abolished the ability of XopQ to interact with the two 14–3–3 proteins and to suppress innate immunity.
+Yeast two-hybrid, bimolecular fluorescence complementation (BiFC) and co-IP assays indicated that XopQ and XopX interact with each other (Deb et al., 2020).
 ===== Conservation =====
@@ Line 88: / Line 92: @@
 Büttner D, Bonas U (2010). Regulation and secretion of //Xanthomonas// virulence factors. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 34: 107-133. DOI: [[https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6976.2009.00192.x|10.1111/j.1574-6976.2009.00192.x]]
-Deb S, Ghosh P, Patel HK, Sonti RV (2020). Interaction of the //Xanthomonas// effectors XopQ and XopX results in induction of rice immune responses. Plant J., in press. DOI: [[https://doi.org/10.1111/tpj.14924|10.1111/tpj.14924]]
+Deb S, Ghosh P, Patel HK, Sonti RV (2020). Interaction of the //Xanthomonas// effectors XopQ and XopX results in induction of rice immune responses.Plant J. 104: 332-350. DOI: [[https://doi.org/10.1111/tpj.14924|10.1111/tpj.14924]]
 Deb S, Gupta MK, Patel HK, Sonti RV (2019). //Xanthomonas oryzae// pv. //oryzae// XopQ protein suppresses rice immune responses through interaction with two 14-3-3 proteins but its phospho-null mutant induces rice immune responses and interacts with another 14-3-3 protein. Mol. Plant Pathol. 20: 976-989. DOI: [[https://doi.org/10.1111/mpp.12807|10.1111/mpp.12807]]

EuroXanth DokuWiki

User Tools

Site Tools

Differences

Page Tools