Pre-announcement of symbiotic guests: transcriptional reprogramming by mycorrhizal lipochitooligosaccharides shows a strict co-dependency on the GRAS transcription factors NSP1 and RAM1

BACKGROUND: More than 80 % of all terrestrial plant species establish an arbuscular mycorrhiza (AM) symbiosis with Glomeromycota fungi. This plant-microbe interaction primarily improves phosphate uptake, but also supports nitrogen, mineral, and water aquisition. During the pre-contact stage, the AM symbiosis is controled by an exchange of diffusible factors from either partner. Amongst others, fungal signals were identified as a mix of sulfated and non-sulfated lipochitooligosaccharides (LCOs), being structurally related to rhizobial nodulation (Nod)-factor LCOs that in legumes induce the formation of nitrogen-fixing root nodules. LCO signals are transduced via a common symbiotic signaling pathway (CSSP) that activates a group of GRAS transcription factors (TFs). Using complex gene expression fingerprints as molecular phenotypes, this study primarily intended to shed light on the importance of the GRAS TFs NSP1 and RAM1 for LCO-activated gene expression during pre-symbiotic signaling. RESULTS: We investigated the genome-wide transcriptional responses in 5 days old primary roots of the Medicago truncatula wild type and four symbiotic mutants to a 6 h challenge with LCO signals supplied at 10(-7/-8) M. We were able to show that during the pre-symbiotic stage, sulfated Myc-, non-sulfated Myc-, and Nod-LCO-activated gene expression almost exclusively depends on the LysM receptor kinase NFP and is largely controled by the CSSP, although responses independent of this pathway exist. Our results show that downstream of the CSSP, gene expression activation by Myc-LCOs supplied at 10(-7/-8) M strictly required both the GRAS transcription factors RAM1 and NSP1, whereas those genes either co- or specifically activated by Nod-LCOs displayed a preferential NSP1-dependency. RAM1, a central regulator of root colonization by AM fungi, controled genes activated by non-sulfated Myc-LCOs during the pre-symbiotic stage that are also up-regulated in areas with early physical contact, e.g. hyphopodia and infecting hyphae; linking responses to externally applied LCOs with early root colonization. CONCLUSIONS: Since both RAM1 and NSP1 were essential for the pre-symbiotic transcriptional reprogramming by Myc-LCOs, we propose that downstream of the CSSP, these GRAS transcription factors act synergistically in the transduction of those diffusible signals that pre-announce the presence of symbiotic fungi.

Transcription of TIR1-Controlled Genes Can be Regulated within 10 Min by an Auxin-Induced Process. Can TIR1 be the Receptor?

ABP1 and TIR1/AFBs are known as auxin receptors. ABP1 is linked to auxin responses several of which are faster than 10 min. TIR1 regulates auxin-induced transcription of early auxin genes also within minutes. We use transcription of such TIR1-dependent genes as indicator of TIR1 activity to show the rapid regulation of TIR1 by exogenous auxin. To this end, we used quantification of transcription of a set of fifteen early auxin-induced reporter genes at t = 10 and t = 30 min to measure this as a TIR1-dependent auxin response. We conducted this study in 22 mutants of auxin transporters (pin5, abcb1, abcb19, and aux1/lax3), protein kinases and phosphatases (ibr5, npr1, cpk3, CPK3-OX, d6pk1, d6pkl1-1, d6pkl3-2, d6pkl1-1/d6pkl2-2, and d6pkl1-1/d6pkl3-2), of fatty acid metabolism (fad2-1, fad6-1, ssi2, lacs4, lacs9, and lacs4/lacs9) and receptors (tir1, tir1/afb2, and tir1/afb3) and compared them to the wild type. After 10 min auxin application, in 18 out of 22 mutants mis-regulated expression of at least one reporter was found, and in 15 mutants transcription of two-to-three out of five selected auxin reporter genes was mis-regulated. After 30 min of auxin application to mutant plants, mis-regulation of reporter genes ranged from one to 13 out of 15 tested reporter genes. Those genes chosen as mutants were themselves not regulated in their expression by auxin for at least 1 h, excluding an influence of TIR1/AFBs on their transcription. The expression of TIR1/AFB genes was also not modulated by auxin for up to 3 h. Together, this excludes a feedback or feedforward of these mutant genes/proteins on TIR1/AFBs output of transcription in this auxin-induced response. However, an auxin-induced response needed an as yet unknown auxin receptor. We suggest that the auxin receptor necessary for the fast auxin-induced transcription modulation could be, instead, ABP1. The alternative hypothesis would be that auxin-induced expression of a protein, initiated by TIR1/AFBs receptors, could initiate these responses and that this unknown protein regulated TIR1/AFB activities within 10 min.