Prioritizing plant defence over growth through WRKY regulation facilitates infestation by non-target herbivores

  1. Ran Li
  2. Jin Zhang
  3. Jiancai Li
  4. Guoxin Zhou
  5. Qi Wang
  6. Wenbo Bian
  7. Matthias Erb
  8. Yonggen Lou  Is a corresponding author
  1. Zhejiang University, China
  2. University of Bern, Switzerland

Abstract

Plants generally respond to herbivore attack by increasing resistance and decreasing growth. This prioritization is achieved through the regulation of phytohormonal signalling networks. However, it remains unknown how this prioritization affects resistance against non-target herbivores. Here, we identify WRKY70 as a specific herbivore-induced, MAPK-regulated rice transcription factor that physically interacts with W-box motives and prioritizes defence over growth by positively regulating jasmonic acid (JA) and negatively regulating gibberellin (GA) biosynthesis upon attack by the chewing herbivore Chilo suppressalis. WRKY70-dependent JA biosynthesis is required for proteinase inhibitor (PI) activation and resistance against C. suppressalis. In contrast, WRKY70 induction increases plant susceptibility against the rice brown planthopper Nilaparvata lugens. Experiments with GA-deficient rice lines identify WRKY70-dependent GA signalling as the causal factor in N. lugens susceptibility. Our study shows that prioritizing defence over growth leads to a significant resistance trade-off with important implications for the evolution and agricultural exploitation of plant immunity.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Ran Li

    State Key Laboratory of Rice Biology, Institute of Insect Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Jin Zhang

    State Key Laboratory of Rice Biology, Institute of Insect Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Jiancai Li

    State Key Laboratory of Rice Biology, Institute of Insect Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Guoxin Zhou

    State Key Laboratory of Rice Biology, Institute of Insect Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Qi Wang

    State Key Laboratory of Rice Biology, Institute of Insect Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Wenbo Bian

    State Key Laboratory of Rice Biology, Institute of Insect Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Matthias Erb

    Institute of Plant Sciences, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Yonggen Lou

    State Key Laboratory of Rice Biology, Institute of Insect Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
    For correspondence
    yglou@zju.edu.cn
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Joerg Bohlmann, University of British Columbia, Canada

Version history

  1. Received: September 17, 2014
  2. Accepted: June 16, 2015
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: June 17, 2015 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: July 6, 2015 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2015, Li 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

  • 3,284
    Page views
  • 941
    Downloads
  • 117
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Scopus, Crossref, PubMed Central.

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. Ran Li
  2. Jin Zhang
  3. Jiancai Li
  4. Guoxin Zhou
  5. Qi Wang
  6. Wenbo Bian
  7. Matthias Erb
  8. Yonggen Lou
(2015)
Prioritizing plant defence over growth through WRKY regulation facilitates infestation by non-target herbivores
eLife 4:e04805.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.04805

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.04805

Further reading

    1. Plant Biology
    Daniel S Yu, Megan A Outram ... Simon J Williams
    Research Article

    Plant pathogens secrete proteins, known as effectors, that function in the apoplast or inside plant cells to promote virulence. Effector recognition by cell-surface or cytosolic receptors results in the activation of defence pathways and plant immunity. Despite their importance, our general understanding of fungal effector function and recognition by immunity receptors remains poor. One complication often associated with effectors is their high sequence diversity and lack of identifiable sequence motifs precluding prediction of structure or function. In recent years, several studies have demonstrated that fungal effectors can be grouped into structural classes, despite significant sequence variation and existence across taxonomic groups. Using protein X-ray crystallography, we identify a new structural class of effectors hidden within the secreted in xylem (SIX) effectors from Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. lycopersici (Fol). The recognised effectors Avr1 (SIX4) and Avr3 (SIX1) represent the founding members of the Fol dual-domain (FOLD) effector class, with members containing two distinct domains. Using AlphaFold2, we predicted the full SIX effector repertoire of Fol and show that SIX6 and SIX13 are also FOLD effectors, which we validated experimentally for SIX6. Based on structural prediction and comparisons, we show that FOLD effectors are present within three divisions of fungi and are expanded in pathogens and symbionts. Further structural comparisons demonstrate that Fol secretes effectors that adopt a limited number of structural folds during infection of tomato. This analysis also revealed a structural relationship between transcriptionally co-regulated effector pairs. We make use of the Avr1 structure to understand its recognition by the I receptor, which leads to disease resistance in tomato. This study represents an important advance in our understanding of Fol-tomato, and by extension plant–fungal interactions, which will assist in the development of novel control and engineering strategies to combat plant pathogens.

    1. Ecology
    2. Plant Biology
    Jamie Mitchel Waterman, Tristan Michael Cofer ... Matthias Erb
    Research Article

    Volatiles emitted by herbivore-attacked plants (senders) can enhance defenses in neighboring plants (receivers), however, the temporal dynamics of this phenomenon remain poorly studied. Using a custom-built, high-throughput proton transfer reaction time-of-flight mass spectrometry (PTR-ToF-MS) system, we explored temporal patterns of volatile transfer and responses between herbivore-attacked and undamaged maize plants. We found that continuous exposure to natural blends of herbivore-induced volatiles results in clocked temporal response patterns in neighboring plants, characterized by an induced terpene burst at the onset of the second day of exposure. This delayed burst is not explained by terpene accumulation during the night, but coincides with delayed jasmonate accumulation in receiver plants. The delayed burst occurs independent of day:night light transitions and cannot be fully explained by sender volatile dynamics. Instead, it is the result of a stress memory from volatile exposure during the first day and secondary exposure to bioactive volatiles on the second day. Our study reveals that prolonged exposure to natural blends of stress-induced volatiles results in a response that integrates priming and direct induction into a distinct and predictable temporal response pattern. This provides an answer to the long-standing question of whether stress volatiles predominantly induce or prime plant defenses in neighboring plants, by revealing that they can do both in sequence.