|
|
||||||||
|
Intragenic Recombination and Diversifying Selection Contribute to the Evolution of Downy Mildew Resistance at the RPP8 Locus of ArabidopsisJohn M. McDowell1,a, Murali Dhandaydham1,a, Terri A. Longa, Mark G. M. Aartsb, Stephen Goffc, Eric B. Holubd, and Jeffery L. Dangla,ea Department of Biology, C.B. 3280 Coker Hall, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-3280 b Department of Molecular Biology, DLO Centre for Plant Breeding and Reproduction Research, Postbus 16, 6700AA, Wageningen, The Netherlands c Biotechnology and Genomics Center, Novartis Crop Protection, Inc., Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709-2257 d Director's Research Group, Horticulture Research International, Wellesbourne, Warwickshire, CV35 9EF, United Kingdom e Curriculum in Genetics and Molecular Biology, C.B. 3280 Coker Hall, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-3280 Correspondence to: Jeffery L. Dangl, dangl{at}email.unc.edu (E-mail), 919-962-1625 (fax).
Pathogen resistance (R) genes of the NBS-LRR class (for nucleotide binding site and leucine-rich repeat) are found in many plant species and confer resistance to a diverse spectrum of pathogens. Little is known about the mechanisms that drive NBS-LRR gene evolution in the hostpathogen arms race. We cloned the RPP8 gene (for resistance to Peronospora parasitica) and compared the structure of alleles at this locus in resistant Landsberg erecta (Ler-0) and susceptible Columbia (Col-0) accessions. RPP8-Ler encodes an NBS-LRR protein with a putative N-terminal leucine zipper and is more closely related to previously cloned R genes that confer resistance to bacterial pathogens than it is to other known RPP genes. The RPP8 haplotype in Ler-0 contains the functional RPP8-Ler gene and a nonfunctional homolog, RPH8A. In contrast, the rpp8 locus in Col-0 contains a single chimeric gene, which was likely derived from unequal crossing over between RPP8-Ler and RPH8A ancestors within a Ler-like haplotype. Sequence divergence among RPP8 family members has been accelerated by positive selection on the putative ligand binding region in the LRRs. These observations indicate that NBS-LRR molecular evolution is driven by the same mechanisms that promote rapid sequence diversification among other genes involved in non-self-recognition.
A broad range of microorganisms have evolved the ability to use plants as a nutritional resource, and plants in turn have evolved multiple lines of defense against pathogen invasion (
Two themes have emerged from recent molecular characterization of R genes. R genes are often members of tightly linked multigene families, which can be functionally diversified (
Two superfamilies of LRR-encoding pathogen R genes have been defined by putative functional motifs and predicted localization of the encoded proteins (
The second and larger R gene superfamily (referred to as NBS-LRR) encodes proteins with a predicted nucleotide binding site followed by a variable number of C-terminal LRRs (
Recent comparative analyses of extracytoplasmic LRR gene clusters have provided insight into their evolution. The Cf-4/9 gene cluster contains related but functionally distinct genes that are subject to positive diversifying selection in the LRRs ( Although NBS-LRR genes are widespread in plants and recognize many types of pathogens, little is known about the mode of NBS-LRR gene evolution. The available NBS-LRR sequences are very divergent from each other and provide no evolutionary insight other than definition of the conserved motifs described above. The structural differences between putative extracytoplasmic LRR proteins and NBS-LRR proteins imply that these two R protein superfamilies are biochemically distinct, and it is therefore of interest to determine whether they have evolved by different mechanisms.
We have used the ArabidopsisP. parasitica (downy mildew) pathosystem for comparative analysis of R gene evolution. P. parasitica is a biotrophic oomycete and a prominent natural pathogen of Arabidopsis in Europe (
Four RPP genes recently have been shown to encode members of the TIR-NBS-LRR subclass (
Genetic and Physical Definition of the RPP8 Locus
Yeast artificial chromosome (YAC) end probes and genetically anchored molecular markers were used to construct a physical map of the RPP8 interval (Figure 1A). The Spl2 and Cra1 markers both mapped within the YAC contig, demonstrating that the contig spanned the RPP8 locus. We genetically mapped four YAC ends as restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLPs) to refine further the RPP8 interval. 5F12LE and 13F5RE RFLPs both cosegregated with RPP8, whereas 8C12LE and 15C8RE detected one recombinant telomeric to RPP8. The Spl28C12LE interval thus defined the smallest possible genetic interval in our mapping population. This genetic distance corresponds to a maximum physical distance of ~100 to 300 kb (Figure 1A).
Identification and Mapping of an RPP8 Candidate Gene
Transgenic Complementation of RPP8 Function
Only one CK1-hybridizing band was detectable in the Col-0 YACs and BACs spanning rpp8 (data not shown), suggesting that only one Col-0 CK1 family member is present in this >470-kb interval. Furthermore, mapping of other CK1-hybridizing bands demonstrated that no other CK1 family members are closely linked to RPP8 (described by
Two Closely Related Genes Are Present at the RPP8 Locus in Ler-0
RPP8-Ler and RPH8A are separated by a 3.7-kb segment containing a putative open reading frame with 75% amino acid similarity to cyclin C from rice (Figure 1C). A fourth open reading frame ~1 kb downstream of RPH8A resembles (~50% amino acid similarity) the tobacco gene NF22 (GenBank accession number
U66266). NF22 was identified by its ability to induce a hypersenstive responselike reaction when overexpressed ( The intronexon structure of RPP8-Ler was deduced by comparison to RPP8 cDNAs and is diagrammed in Figure 1C. The RPP8 coding sequence contains two introns: intron 1 (129 bp) splits codon 292, and intron 2 (675 bp) splits codon 341. A third intron (123 bp) begins 4 bp downstream of the stop codon in the RPP8 cDNA. Sequence analysis of 11 independent RPP8-Ler clones revealed variable polyadenylation sites ~450 bp downstream of the stop codon. The gene structure of RPH8A could not be confirmed by cDNA comparison because no RPH8A cDNAs were isolated, but it is probably identical because conserved intronexon border sequences were found at identical locations in the RPH8A coding sequence. Interestingly, the 3' ends of RPP8-Ler and RPH8A are identical over an 898-bp stretch, from codon 837 to 688 bp downstream of the stop codon (including the intron, 3' untranslated region, and downstream nontranscribed sequence). After this 898-bp stretch, similarity between the two genes is very low. The 5' flanking sequences of RPP8-Ler and RPH8A are almost completely dissimilar, except for a 90-bp stretch of 89% identity, which begins 473 and 692 bp upstream of the RPP8-Ler and RPH8A start codons, respectively.
RPP8 Encodes a Member of the LZ-NBS-LRR Subclass
The rpp8 Allele in Col-0 Is a Chimera of Progenitor Genes Related to RPP8-Ler and RPH8A Seven insertion/deletion sites, shown in Figure 5, were used as landmarks to localize the most likely recombination breakpoint. rpp8-Col shares with RPP8-Ler a 9-bp insertion (codons 147 to 149) and a 6-bp deletion (codons 484 to 485) relative to the RPH8A sequence (Figure 4 and Figure 5). rpp8-Col also shares four additional indels with RPP8-Ler in intron 2 (Figure 5). rpp8-Col shares a 6-bp insertion with RPH8A, relative to RPP8-Ler, at codons 560 to 561. The recombination breakpoint thus appears to be located between codons 486 and 559, which includes the region just upstream of the LRRs as well as part of the first LRR (Figure 3 and Figure 4). Interestingly, most of the indels encompass short direct repeats (Figure 5), which suggests that they could have been generated by transposon insertion and subsequent excision.
The pattern of nucleotide polymorphisms between RPP8-Ler, RPH8A, and rpp8-Col is very complicated, as shown in Figure 6. We observed a lack of consistent sequence affiliation, based on shared nucleotide polymorphisms, between any pair of homologs. Instead, the three RPP8 homologs exhibit a patchwork pattern of affiliations in their coding sequences. For example, the majority of polymorphisms (23 of 39) in the first 1000 bp support an affiliation between RPP8-Ler and rpp8-Col, which is consistent with the hypothesis that the 5' end of rpp8-Col was derived from an RPP8-Lerlike ancestor. Similarly, the majority of 3' polymorphisms support an affiliation between rpp8-Col and RPH8A. However, there are segments of contiguous polymorphisms that support different affiliations. For example, nucleotides 130 to 301 contain seven polymorphisms that affiliate RPP8-Ler with RPH8A rather than rpp8-Col. This suggests that a recent exchange occurred between the two Ler-0 genes. Alternatively, this affiliation could reflect the accumulation of contiguous point mutations in the Col-0 allele. Comparisons with other RPP8 homologs are necessary to distinguish accurately between these possibilities.
Several of the LRR-encoding segments are extremely divergent among the three genes (Figure 4 and Figure 6). The degree of divergence among the LRRs is variable, with LRRs 11 and 12 exhibiting the highest divergence and LRRs 3, 10, 13, and 14 exhibiting the highest degree of conservation. Perhaps the divergent LRRs are directly involved in recognition specificity, whereas the conserved LRRs play a structural role. Two highly variable regions also are apparent outside the LRRs (amino acid residues 432 to 442 and 480 to 489). They do not fall within any recognizable functional motif. We predict that these regions define a new set of functionally relevant residues.
Analysis of rpp8 Mutants in Ler-0 Results from genetic analysis of the rpp8 mutants are summarized in Table 2. F1 progeny from backcrosses of all six mutants to Ler-0 were resistant to Emco5 (Table 2 and Figure 2B), demonstrating that the mutations were recessive. Trypan blue staining of backcross F1 plants revealed occasional trails of necrotic host cells in the cotyledons (Figure 2B), suggestive of a slightly delayed defense response. This phenomenon was also observed in F1 progeny from a cross of wild-type Col-0 x Ler-0 (data not shown), suggesting that RPP8-Ler is not completely dominant with respect to rpp8-Col. F2 progeny from the backcrosses of rpp8-2 and rpp8-3 to Ler-0 segregated ~3 resistant:1 susceptible, which is consistent with a single recessive mutation. F2 progeny from the rpp8-1 x Ler-0 backcross did not segregate any individuals that supported sporulation. This most likely reflects the very weak effect of the rpp8-1 mutation, as suggested by the weak and inconsistent Emco5 growth in the rpp8-1 M3 seedlings described above. Outcrosses of all of the six mutants to wild-type Col-0 as well as three intermutant crosses yielded susceptible F1 progeny (Figure 2B and Table 2). Because RPP8 is the only locus for Emco5 resistance that segregates between Col-0 and Ler-0, the observed lack of complementation in F1 progeny of these crosses strongly suggests that all seven mutations are in RPP8. F2 segregation ratios from three tested outcrosses to Col-0 were consistent with this hypothesis. A significant proportion of F2 progeny from the rpp8-1 x Col-0 cross did not support sporulation, most likely because of the weak effect of the rpp8-1 mutation. F2 progeny from the intermutant crosses also segregated for disease-free individuals. This could reflect the additive effect of two partially functional mutations. Chi-square analysis (Table 2) strongly contradicts the hypothesis that the mutations are in unlinked second site loci (predicted 9 resistant:7 susceptible segregation in outcross and intermutant F2 populations). For further confirmation that these mutations are in the RPP8 gene, we compared the rpp8 coding sequence from four mutants with the wild-type RPP8-Ler sequence. In rpp8-1, a C-to-T mutation in codon 827 caused an S-to-L substitution in LRR12 (Figure 4). In rpp8-2, a G-to-A mutation in codon 553 caused an R-to-K substitution in LRR1. In rpp8-3, a G-to-A mutation in codon 418 caused a D-to-N substitution. In rpp8-4, a C-to-T mutation in codon 151 created a stop codon. These sequence alterations confirm that the R gene candidate is indeed RPP8.
Nucleotide Substitution Patterns Suggest That Positive Selection Has Been Acting on RPP8
Much of amino acid divergence among the three RPP8 family members was concentrated in a subdomain of the LRRs (XX[L]X[L]XXXX), where leucine, isoleucine, or valine residues are found at the conserved positions designated by an L (Figure 3 and Figure 4). This motif encompasses a predicted ß strand/ß turn region in which hydrophobic side chains at the conserved positions are buried in the core, and the nonconserved, interstitial residues (designated by X) are solvent exposed (
Plants may have an inherent disadvantage in the gene-for-gene arms race, because loss-of-function mutations in pathogen avr genes are sufficient to disarm gene-for-gene resistance. In contrast, the host must respond with a corresponding gain of function (recognition), and accumulation of point mutations in preexisting R genes alone may not provide sufficient structural diversity for novel resistance specificities to evolve in a timely fashion. Below, we discuss the implications of our results that are relevant to this conundrum.
Structurally Distinct NBS-LRR Subclasses Can Function in P. parasitica Resistance
Recent genetic evidence suggests that RPP8-mediated resistance may operate through a different signaling pathway from RPP1 and RPP5. The Arabidopsis eds1 (for enhanced disease susceptibility) mutation abolishes the function of several RPP genes, including RPP5 and RPP1; however, eds1 has little or no effect on RPP8 function (
A Novel rpp8 Haplotype Was Generated by an Unequal Crossover between Linked Genes The functional roles of rpp8-Col and RPH8A are currently unknown. Neither gene is sufficient for resistance to Emco5 in Col-0, but both genes encode predicted full-length proteins. The nonrandom pattern of substitutions in ß strand/ß turn LRR-encoding motifs of both genes suggest that they are functional and remain under selection. We did not find RPH8A cDNAs among the 25 that were isolated, but rpp8-Col is expressed, as evidenced by complete identity to the Col-0 expressed sequence tag clone T14073. Therefore, it seems likely that these genes recognize currently undefined pathogens, and experiments are under way to define their functions genetically.
It is also possible that the rpp8-Col and RPH8A genes are obsolete or superfluous. A potential analogy may exist in the MHC, which contains functional class 1a antigen presentation genes as well as class 1b genes, which evolved from class 1a genes by duplication (
RPP8 Sequence Diversity Arises from Positive Selection What mechanisms generate the mutations upon which selection acts? Point substitutions are undoubtedly a primary source; however, we found it intriguing that most of the insertion/deletion sites among the three genes, including three indels that encompassed two or three codons, comprise direct repeats of varying degeneracies (Figure 5). This direct repeat structure suggests target site duplication and subsequent imprecise excision of a transposable element(s). Perhaps transposon insertions occurred in RPP8 immediately after the RPP8-Ler/RPH8A duplication, allowing one homolog to compensate for loss of the other until the transposon was excised. Periods of decreased pathogen pressure also could provide windows of opportunity for transposon insertions (or other sequence rearrangements) to accumulate at no cost to the plant. Regardless of whether the RPP8 indels were generated by transposons, their presence suggests alternative mutational mechanisms that augment diversification from point substitutions.
Recombination and gene conversion also may have generated sequence diversity at RPP8. Although these two mechanisms cannot create nucleotide substitutions, they can reassort existing mutations and cause amino acid substitutions by creating novel codons at recombination breakpoints, as seen in the Cf-4/9 complex ( In combination with other recent comparative analyses of R gene structure, our results have established clear mechanistic parallels between the evolution of the two R gene superfamilies and other loci that determine the outcome of interactions. A growing body of data suggests that genes mediating coevolutionary self- and non-self-interactions are subject to a mode and tempo of evolution that differ dramatically from most other types of genes. Future studies expanding our understanding of the interplay between mutation, recombination, and selection in the generation of novel pathogen R genes should provide insights of broad academic and agricultural significance.
Emco5 Derivation and Pathogenicity Tests
Pathogenicity tests and mutant screens were conducted by spraying 7-day-old seedlings with a suspension of asexual inoculum (5 x 104 conidiosporangia mL-1). Seedlings were then covered with a transparent dome to maintain high humidity and to contain the isolate throughout the experiment. Seedlings were grown for 7 days at 16 to 18°C with an 8-hr photoperiod in a Percival Scientific growth chamber (Boone, Iowa). P. parasitica growth was assessed visually at 7 days after inoculation by counting sporangiophores on both sides of the cotyledon and classifying plants as either N (no sporangiophores), L (1 to 10 sporangiophores), M (11 to 19 sporangiophores), or H (20 or more sporangiophores). To calculate the mean sporangiophore production shown in Table 1, we used actual numbers (0 to 10) for N and L cotyledons and assigned values of 15 (M) and 20 (H). Hyphal growth was assessed by staining inoculated seedlings with lactophenoltrypan blue (
Identification and Sequencing of rpp8 Mutants We used Ler-0 plants with the ttg marker in this screen to distinguish rogue seeds or outcross contaminants visually. In addition, we tested DNA from each mutant with a set of cleaved amplified polymorphic sequences and simple sequence length polymorphism markers from throughout the genome that distinguished polymorphisms between Ler-0 and two Emco5-compatible accessions, Col-0 and Ws-0. A Ler-0 pattern was observed for every marker tested in each mutant (data not shown), thereby demonstrating that the mutants were derived from the Ler-0 background. We determined the sequence of the mutant Ler rpp8 alleles by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification and direct sequencing of the entire PCR product. Multiple amplification products were sequenced to check for misincorporations during the amplification. We designed PCR primers based on the sequence variation that exists between RPP8-Ler and RPH8A to amplify specifically the RPP8-Ler gene. Gene specificity of the primer sets was confirmed using pRPP8 and pRPH8A as controls. Primer sequences will be provided upon request.
Yeast and Bacterial Artificial Chromosome Manipulation
cDNA and Genomic Clone Isolation
RPP8 Subclones
Plant Transformation
DNA Sequencing
Sequence similarity searches were conducted using the BLAST program with default settings (
1 These authors contributed equally to this work.
We gratefully acknowledge the following contributions: Miguel Botella, Mark Coleman, and Jonathan Jones for providing Ler-0 genomic and cDNA libraries; Guillermo Cardon for providing the Spl2 sequence; Canan Can and Patricia Chimot for assistance with P. parasitica isolate characterization and confirmation of pathology data; Claire Lister, Caroline Dean, and Renate Schmidt for assistance with genetic and physical mapping; and Ian Crute, Ben Holt, Susanne Kjemtrup, and Rheinhard Kunze for providing helpful comments on the manuscript. This work was supported by grants from the U.S. Department of Agriculture National Research Initiative Competitive Grants Program (to J.L.D.), the U.K. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (to E.B.H.), and The Netherlands Technology Foundation (to M.G.M.A.). J.M.M. was supported by a postdoctoral fellowship from the National Institutes of Health. Received June 23, 1998; accepted September 11, 1998.
Aarts, M.G.M., te Lintel Hekkert, B., Holub, E.B., Beynon, J.L., Stiekema, W.J., and Pereira, A. (1998) Identification of R-gene homologous DNA fragments genetically linked to disease resistance loci in Arabidopsis thaliana.. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact. 11:251-258[Medline].
Aarts, N., Metz, M., Holub, E., Staskawicz, B.J., Daniels, M.J., and Parker, J.E. (1998) Different requirements for EDS1 and NDR1 by disease resistance genes define at least two R genemediated pathways in Arabidopsis.. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95:10306-10311 Altschul, S.F., Gish, W., Miller, W., Meyers, E.W., and Lipman, D.J. (1990) Basic local alignment search tool. J. Mol. Biol. 215:403-410[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]. Anderson, P.A., Lawrence, G.J., Morrish, B.C., Ayliffe, M.A., Finnegan, E.J., and Ellis, J.G. (1997) Inactivation of the flax rust resistance gene M associated with loss of a repeated unit within the leucine-rich repeat coding region. Plant Cell 9:641-651[Abstract]. Bechtold, N., Ellis, J., and Pelletier, G. (1993) In planta Agrobacterium-mediated gene transfer by infiltration of Arabidopsis thaliana plants. C. R. Acad. Sci. Ser. III Sci. Vie 316:1194-1199. Becker, D., Kemper, E., Schell, J., and Masterson, R. (1992) New plant binary vectors with selectable markers located proximal to the left T-DNA border. Plant Mol. Biol. 20:1195-1197[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]. Bent, A.F. (1996) Plant disease resistance genes: Function meets structure. Plant Cell 8:1757-1771[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline].
Bent, A.F., Kunkel, B.N., Dahlbeck, D., Brown, K.L., Schmidt, R., Giraudat, J., Leung, J., and Staskawicz, B.J. (1994) RPS2 of Arabidopsis thaliana: A leucine-rich repeat class of plant disease resistance genes. Science 265:1856-1860
Bergelson, J., Stahl, E., Dudek, S., and Kreitman, M. (1998) Genetic variation within and among populations of Arabidopsis thaliana.. Genetics 148:1311-1323
Botella, M.A., Parker, J.E., Frost, L.N., Bittner-Eddy, P.D., Beynon, J.L., Daniels, M.J., Holub, E.B., and Jones, J.D.G. (1998) Three genes of the Arabidopsis RPP1 complex resistance locus recognize distinct Peronospora parasitica avirulence determinants. Plant Cell 10:1847-1860 Choi, S., Creelman, R.A., Mullet, J.E., and Wing, R.A. (1995) Construction and characterization of a bacterial artificial chromosome library of Arabidopsis thaliana.. Plant Mol. Biol. 13:124-128. Dangl, J.L. (1992) The major histocompatibility complex a la carte: Are there analogies to plant disease resistance genes on the menu? Plant J. 2:3-11. Dangl, J.L. (1995) Pièce de résistance: Novel classes of plant disease resistance genes. Cell 80:363-366[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]. Dixon, M.S., Jones, D.A., Keddie, J.S., Thomas, C.M., Harrison, K., and Jones, J.D.G. (1996) The tomato Cf-2 disease resistance locus comprises two functional genes encoding leucine-rich repeat proteins. Cell 84:451-459[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]. Ellis, J., Lawrence, G., Ayliffe, M., Anderson, P., Collins, N., Finnegan, J., Frost, D., Luck, J., and Pryor, T. (1997) Advances in the molecular genetic analysis of the flaxflax rust interaction. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 35:271-291[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]. Endo, T., Ikeo, K., and Gojobori, T. (1996) Large-scale search for genes upon which positive selection may operate. Mol. Biol. Evol. 13:685-690[Abstract]. Flor, H.H. (1971) Current status of the gene-for-gene concept. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 9:275-296[CrossRef][Web of Science].
Grant, M.R., Godiard, L., Straube, E., Ashfield, T., Lewald, J., Sattler, A., Innes, R.W., and Dangl, J.L. (1995) Structure of the Arabidopsis RPM1 gene enabling dual specificity disease resistance. Science 269:843-846 Hammond-Kosack, K.E., and Jones, J.D.G. (1996a) Resistance genedependent plant defense responses. Plant Cell 8:1773-1791[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]. Hammond-Kosack, K.E., and Jones, J.D.G. (1996b) Plant disease resistance genes. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 48:575-607[CrossRef][Web of Science]. Holub, E.B., and Beynon, J.L. (1996) Symbiology of mouse ear cress (Arabidopsis thaliana) and oomycetes. Adv. Bot. Res. 24:228-273. Holub, E.B., Beynon, J.L., and Crute, I.R. (1994) Phenotypic and genotypic characterization of interactions between isolates of Peronospora parasitica and accessions of Arabidopsis thaliana.. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact. 7:223-239[Web of Science]. Hughes, A.L. (1995) Origin and evolution of HLA class I pseudogenes. Mol. Biol. Evol. 12:247-258[Abstract]. Hughes, A.L., and Yeager, M. (1997) Molecular evolution of the vertebrate immune system. Bioessays 19:777-786[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]. Hulbert, S.H. (1997) Structure and evolution of the Rp1 complex conferring rust resistance in maize. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 35:293-310[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]. Jones, D.A., and Jones, J.D.G. (1996) The roles of leucine rich repeats in plant defences. Adv. Bot. Res. Adv. Plant Pathol. 24:90-167. Joosten, M.H.A.J., Vogelsang, R., Cozijnsen, T.J., Verberne, M.C., and De Wit, P.J.G.M. (1997) The biotrophic fungus Cladosporium fulvum circumvents Cf-4mediated resistance by producing unstable AVR4 elicitors. Plant Cell 9:367-379[Abstract]. Karrer, E.E., Beachy, R.N., and Holt, C.A. (1998) Cloning of tobacco genes that elicit the hypersensitive response. Plant Mol. Biol. 36:681-690[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]. Keen, N.T. (1990) Gene-for-gene complementarity in plantpathogen interactions. Annu. Rev. Genet. 24:447-463[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline].
Klein, J., and O'hUigin, C. (1994) The conundrum of nonclassical histocompatibility complex genes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 91:6251-6252 Kobe, B., and Deisenhofer, J. (1993) Crystal structure of porcine ribonuclease inhibitor, a protein with leucine rich repeats. Nature 366:751-756[CrossRef][Medline]. Kobe, B., and Deisenhofer, J. (1995) Proteins with leucine rich repeats. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 5:409-416[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline].
Koch, E., and Slusarenko, A. (1990) Arabidopsis is susceptible to infection by a downy mildew fungus. Plant Cell 2:437-445 Kreitman, M., and Akashi, H. (1995) Molecular evidence for natural selection. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 26:403-422[Web of Science]. Lawrence, G.J., Finnegan, E.J., Ayliffe, M.A., and Ellis, J.G. (1995) The L6 gene for flax rust resistance is related to the Arabidopsis bacterial resistance gene RPS2 and the tobacco viral resistance gene N.. Plant Cell 7:1195-1206[Abstract].
Leister, R.T., Ausubel, F.M., and Katagiri, F. (1996) Molecular recognition of pathogen attack occurs inside of plant cells in plant disease resistance specified by the Arabidopsis genes RPS2 and RPM1.. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93:15497-15502 Lister, C., and Dean, C. (1993) Recombinant inbred lines for mapping RFLP and phenotypic markers in Arabidopsis thaliana.. Plant J. 4:745-750[CrossRef][Web of Science].
Martin, G.B., Brommonschenkel, S.H., Chunwongse, J., Frary, A., Ganal, M.W., Spivey, R., Wu, T., Earle, E.D., and Tanksley, S.D. (1993) Map-based cloning of a protein kinase gene conferring disease resistance in tomato. Science 262:1432-1436 Martin, G.B., Frary, A., Wu, T., Brommonschenkel, S., Chunwongse, J., Earle, E.D., and Tanksley, S.D. (1994) A member of the tomato Pto gene family confers sensitivity to fenthion resulting in rapid cell death. Plant Cell 6:1543-1552[Abstract]. Matallana, E., Bell, C.J., Lu, P.J., and Ecker, J.E. (1992). Genetic and physical linkage of the Arabidopsis genome: Methods for anchoring yeast artificial chromosomes. In Methods in Arabidopsis Research, C. Koncz, N.-H. Chua, and J. Schell, eds (Singapore: World Scientific), pp. 144169. Mindrinos, M., Katagiri, F., Yu, G.-L., and Ausubel, F.M. (1994) The A. thaliana disease resistance gene RPS2 encodes a protein containing a nucleotide-binding site and leucine-rich repeats. Cell 78:1089-1099[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]. Nei, M., and Hughes, A. (1992). Balanced polymorphism and evolution by the birth and death process in the MHC loci. In Proceedings of the Eleventh Histocompatibility Workshop and Conference, K. Tsuji, M. Aizawa, and T. Suzuki, eds (Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press), pp. 2738. Parham, P., and Ohta, T. (1996) Population biology of antigen presentation by MHC class I molecules. Science 272:67-74[Abstract].
Parker, J.E., Coleman, M.J., Szabò, V., Frost, L.N., Schmidt, R., van der Biezen, E.A., Moores, T., Dean, C., Daniels, M.J., and Jones, J.D.G. (1997) The Arabidopsis downy mildew resistance gene RPP5 shares similarity to the Toll and interleukin-1 receptors with N and L6.. Plant Cell 9:879-894 Parniske, M., Hammond-Kosack, K.E., Golstein, C., Thomas, C.M., Jones, D.A., Harrison, K., Wulff, B.B.H., and Jones, J.D.G. (1997) Novel disease resistance specificities result from sequence exchange between tandemly repeated genes at the Cf-4/9 locus of tomato. Cell 91:821-832[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline].
Reiter, R.S., Williams, J.G.K., Feldman, K.A., Rafalski, J.A., Tingey, S.V., and Scolnik, P.A. (1992) Global and local genome mapping in Arabidopsis thaliana by using recombinant inbred lines and random amplified polymorphic DNAs. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89:1477-1481 Rohe, M., Gierlich, A., Hermann, H., Hahn, M., Schmidt, B., Rosahl, S., and Knogge, W. (1995) The race-specific elicitor, NIP1, from the barley pathogen, Rhynchosporium secalis, determines avirulence on host plants of the Rrs1 resistance genotype. EMBO J. 14:4168-4177[Web of Science][Medline]. Salmeron, J.M., Oldroyd, G.E.D., Rommens, C.M.T., Scofield, S.R., Kim, H.-S., Lavelle, D.T., Dahlbeck, D., and Staskawicz, B.J. (1996) Tomato Prf is a member of the leucine-rich repeat class of plant disease resistance genes and lies embedded within the Pto kinase gene cluster. Cell 86:123-133[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline].
Song, W.-Y., Wang, G.-L., Chen, L.-L., Kim, H.-S., Pi, L.-Y., Holsten, T., Gardner, J., Wang, B., Zhai, W.-X., Zhu, L.-H., Fauquet, C., and Ronald, P.C. (1995) A receptor kinaselike protein encoded by the rice disease resistance gene, Xa21.. Science 270:1804-1806 Song, W.-Y., Pi, L.-Y., Wang, G.-L., Gardner, J., Holsten, T., and Ronald, P.C. (1997) Evolution of the rice Xa21 disease resistance gene family. Plant Cell 9:1279-1287[Abstract]. Sweigard, J.A., Carroll, A.M., Kang, S., Farrall, L., Chumley, F.G., and Valent, B. (1995) Identification, cloning, and characterization of PWL2, a gene for host species specificity in the rice blast fungus. Plant Cell 7:1221-1233[Abstract]. Tör, M., Holub, E.B., Brose, E., Musker, R., Gunn, N., Can, C., Crute, I.R., and Beynon, J.L. (1994) Map positions of three loci in Arabidopsis thaliana associated with isolate-specific recognition of Peronospora parasitica.. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact. 7:214-222. van Kan, J.A.L., van den Ackerveken, G.F.J.M., and de Wit, P.G.J.M. (1991) Cloning and characterization of cDNA of avirulence gene avr9 of the fungal pathogen Cladosporium fulvum, causal agent of tomato leaf mold. Mol. Plant-Microbe Interact. 4:52-59[Web of Science][Medline].
Wang, G.-L., Ruan, D.-L., Song, W.-Y., Sideris, S., Chen, L., Pi, L.-Y., Zhang, S., Zhang, Z., Fauquet, C., Gaut, B.S., Whalen, M.C., and Ronald, P.C. (1998) Xa21D encodes a receptor-like molecule with a leucine-rich repeat domain that determines race-specific recognition and is subject to adaptive evolution. Plant Cell 10:765-779 Whitham, S., Dinesh-Kumar, S.P., Choi, D., Hehl, R., Corr, C., and Baker, B. (1994) The product of the tobacco mosaic virus resistance gene N: Similarity to Toll and the interleukin-1 receptor. Cell 78:1101-1115[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline].
Yoshimura, S., Yamanouchi, U., Katayose, Y., Toki, S., Wang, Z.X., Kono, I., Kurata, N., Yano, M., Iwata, N., and Sasaki, T. (1998) Expression of Xa1, a bacterial blight-resistance gene in rice, is induced by bacterial inoculation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95:1663-1668
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ASPB Publications | THE PLANT CELL | PLANT PHYSIOLOGY | |
|---|---|---|---|