Auxin efflux by PIN-FORMED proteins is activated by two different protein kinases, D6 PROTEIN KINASE and PINOID

  1. Melina Zourelidou
  2. Birgit Absmanner
  3. Benjamin Weller
  4. Inês CR Barbosa
  5. Björn C Willige
  6. Astrid Fastner
  7. Verena Streit
  8. Sarah A Port
  9. Jean Colcombet
  10. Sergio de la Fuente van Bentem
  11. Heribert Hirt
  12. Bernhard Kuster
  13. Waltraud X Schulze
  14. Ulrich Z Hammes
  15. Claus Schwechheimer  Is a corresponding author
  1. Technische Universität München, Germany
  2. Universität Regensburg, Germany
  3. Salk Institute for Biological Studies, United States
  4. Göttingen University Medical Center, Germany
  5. Université Evry, France
  6. Syngenta Seeds B.V, Netherlands
  7. King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Saudi Arabia
  8. Max-Planck-Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Germany

Abstract

The development and morphology of vascular plants is critically determined by synthesis and proper distribution of the phytohormone auxin. The directed cell-to-cell distribution of auxin is achieved through a system of auxin influx and efflux transporters. PIN-FORMED (PIN) proteins are proposed auxin efflux transporters, and auxin fluxes can seemingly be predicted based on the - in many cells - asymmetric plasma membrane distribution of PINs. Here, we show in a heterologous Xenopus oocyte system as well as in Arabidopsis thaliana inflorescence stems that PIN-mediated auxin transport is directly activated by D6 PROTEIN KINASE (D6PK) and PINOID (PID)/WAG kinases of the Arabidopsis AGCVIII kinase family. At the same time, we reveal that D6PKs and PID have differential phosphosite preferences. Our study suggests that PIN activation by protein kinases is a crucial component of auxin transport control that must be taken into account to understand auxin distribution within the plant.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Melina Zourelidou

    Technische Universität München, Freising, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Birgit Absmanner

    Universität Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Benjamin Weller

    Technische Universität München, Freising, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Inês CR Barbosa

    Technische Universität München, Freising, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Björn C Willige

    Salk Institute for Biological Studies, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Astrid Fastner

    Universität Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Verena Streit

    Technische Universität München, Freising, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Sarah A Port

    Göttingen University Medical Center, Göttingen, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Jean Colcombet

    Université Evry, Evry, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Sergio de la Fuente van Bentem

    Syngenta Seeds B.V, Enkhuizen, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Heribert Hirt

    King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Thuwal, Saudi Arabia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Bernhard Kuster

    Technische Universität München, Freising, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Waltraud X Schulze

    Max-Planck-Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Potsdam, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Ulrich Z Hammes

    Universität Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Claus Schwechheimer

    Technische Universität München, Freising, Germany
    For correspondence
    claus.schwechheimer@wzw.tum.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: This study was performed in strict accordance with the recommendations and guidelines based on the Tierschutzgesetz (TierSchG) of the Federal Republic of Germany.

Copyright

© 2014, Zourelidou et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 5,065
    views
  • 849
    downloads
  • 205
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Melina Zourelidou
  2. Birgit Absmanner
  3. Benjamin Weller
  4. Inês CR Barbosa
  5. Björn C Willige
  6. Astrid Fastner
  7. Verena Streit
  8. Sarah A Port
  9. Jean Colcombet
  10. Sergio de la Fuente van Bentem
  11. Heribert Hirt
  12. Bernhard Kuster
  13. Waltraud X Schulze
  14. Ulrich Z Hammes
  15. Claus Schwechheimer
(2014)
Auxin efflux by PIN-FORMED proteins is activated by two different protein kinases, D6 PROTEIN KINASE and PINOID
eLife 3:e02860.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.02860

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.02860

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Plant Biology
    Masanori Izumi, Sakuya Nakamura ... Shinya Hagihara
    Research Article

    Plants distribute many nutrients to chloroplasts during leaf development and maturation. When leaves senesce or experience sugar starvation, the autophagy machinery degrades chloroplast proteins to facilitate efficient nutrient reuse. Here, we report on the intracellular dynamics of an autophagy pathway responsible for piecemeal degradation of chloroplast components. Through live-cell monitoring of chloroplast morphology, we observed the formation of chloroplast budding structures in sugar-starved leaves. These buds were then released and incorporated into the vacuolar lumen as an autophagic cargo termed a Rubisco-containing body. The budding structures did not accumulate in mutants of core autophagy machinery, suggesting that autophagosome creation is required for forming chloroplast buds. Simultaneous tracking of chloroplast morphology and autophagosome development revealed that the isolation membranes of autophagosomes interact closely with part of the chloroplast surface before forming chloroplast buds. Chloroplasts then protrude at the site associated with the isolation membranes, which divide synchronously with autophagosome maturation. This autophagy-related division does not require DYNAMIN-RELATED PROTEIN 5B, which constitutes the division ring for chloroplast proliferation in growing leaves. An unidentified division machinery may thus fragment chloroplasts for degradation in coordination with the development of the chloroplast-associated isolation membrane.

    1. Plant Biology
    Koji Kato, Yoshiki Nakajima ... Ryo Nagao
    Research Article

    Photosynthetic organisms exhibit remarkable diversity in their light-harvesting complexes (LHCs). LHCs are associated with photosystem I (PSI), forming a PSI-LHCI supercomplex. The number of LHCI subunits, along with their protein sequences and pigment compositions, has been found to differ greatly among the PSI-LHCI structures. However, the mechanisms by which LHCIs recognize their specific binding sites within the PSI core remain unclear. In this study, we determined the cryo-electron microscopy structure of a PSI supercomplex incorporating fucoxanthin chlorophyll a/c-binding proteins (FCPs), designated as PSI-FCPI, isolated from the diatom Thalassiosira pseudonana CCMP1335. Structural analysis of PSI-FCPI revealed five FCPI subunits associated with a PSI monomer; these subunits were identified as RedCAP, Lhcr3, Lhcq10, Lhcf10, and Lhcq8. Through structural and sequence analyses, we identified specific protein–protein interactions at the interfaces between FCPI and PSI subunits, as well as among FCPI subunits themselves. Comparative structural analyses of PSI-FCPI supercomplexes, combined with phylogenetic analysis of FCPs from T. pseudonana and the diatom Chaetoceros gracilis, underscore the evolutionary conservation of protein motifs crucial for the selective binding of individual FCPI subunits. These findings provide significant insights into the molecular mechanisms underlying the assembly and selective binding of FCPIs in diatoms.