Premium
Topology of the network integrating salicylate and jasmonate signal transduction derived from global expression phenotyping
Author(s) -
Glazebrook Jane,
Chen Wenqiong,
Estes Bram,
Chang HurSong,
Nawrath Christiane,
Métraux JeanPierre,
Zhu Tong,
Katagiri Fumiaki
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
the plant journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.058
H-Index - 269
eISSN - 1365-313X
pISSN - 0960-7412
DOI - 10.1046/j.1365-313x.2003.01717.x
Subject(s) - mutant , npr1 , biology , signal transduction , jasmonic acid , microbiology and biotechnology , phenotype , gene , gene expression , genetics , medicine , heart failure , natriuretic peptide
Summary The signal transduction network controlling plant responses to pathogens includes pathways requiring the signal molecules salicylic acid (SA), jasmonic acid (JA), and ethylene (ET). The network topology was explored using global expression phenotyping of wild‐type and signaling‐defective mutant plants, including eds3 , eds4 , eds5 , eds8 , pad1 , pad2 , pad4 , NahG , npr1 , sid2 , ein2 , and coi1 . Hierarchical clustering was used to define groups of mutations with similar effects on gene expression and groups of similarly regulated genes. Mutations affecting SA signaling formed two groups: one comprised of eds4 , eds5 , sid2 , and npr1‐3 affecting only SA signaling; and the other comprised of pad2, eds3 , npr1‐1 , pad4 , and NahG affecting SA signaling as well as another unknown process. Major differences between the expression patterns in NahG and the SA biosynthetic mutant sid2 suggest that NahG has pleiotropic effects beyond elimination of SA. A third group of mutants comprised of eds8 , pad1 , ein2 , and coi1 affected ethylene and jasmonate signaling. Expression patterns of some genes revealed mutual inhibition between SA‐ and JA‐dependent signaling, while other genes required JA and ET signaling as well as the unknown signaling process for full expression. Global expression phenotype similarities among mutants suggested, and experiments confirmed, that EDS3 affects SA signaling while EDS8 and PAD1 affect JA signaling. This work allowed modeling of network topology, definition of co‐regulated genes, and placement of previously uncharacterized regulatory genes in the network.