Identification of distinct pH-and zeaxanthin-dependent quenching in LHCSR3 from Chlamydomonas reinhardtii
Abstract
Under high light, oxygenic photosynthetic organisms avoid photodamage by thermally dissipating absorbed energy, which is called non-photochemical quenching. In green algae, a chlorophyll and carotenoid-binding protein, light-harvesting complex stress-related (LHCSR3), detects excess energy via a pH drop and serves as a quenching site. Using a combined in vivo and in vitro approach, we investigated quenching within LHCSR3 from Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. In vitro two distinct quenching processes, individually controlled by pH and zeaxanthin, were identified within LHCSR3. The pH-dependent quenching was removed within a mutant LHCSR3 that lacks the residues that are protonated to sense the pH drop. Observation of quenching in zeaxanthin-enriched LHCSR3 even at neutral pH demonstrated zeaxanthin-dependent quenching, which also occurs in other light-harvesting complexes. Either pH- or zeaxanthin-dependent quenching prevented the formation of damaging reactive oxygen species, and thus the two quenching processes may together provide different induction and recovery kinetics for photoprotection in a changing environment.
Data availability
Source data files have been provided for Figures 1A and 3.Single-molecule photon emission data for Figures 1B-D and 2 has been deposited on Zenodo.org and is available at 10.5281/zenodo.4306869
Article and author information
Author details
Funding
Human Frontiers Science Program (RGY0076)
- Gabriela S Schlau-Cohen
National Science Foundation (CHE-1740645)
- Gabriela S Schlau-Cohen
H2020 European Research Council (679814)
- Matteo Ballottari
Korea Ministry of Science and ICT (NRF-2014M1A8A1049273)
- EonSeon Jin
Arnold and Mabel Beckman Foundation (Postdoctoral Fellowship)
- Julianne M Troiano
National Science Foundation (Graduate Research Fellowship)
- Raymundo Moya
Arnold and Mabel Beckman Foundation (Beckman Young Investigator)
- Gabriela S Schlau-Cohen
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.
Reviewing Editor
- David M Kramer, Michigan State University, United States
Version history
- Received: June 24, 2020
- Accepted: January 14, 2021
- Accepted Manuscript published: January 15, 2021 (version 1)
- Version of Record published: February 5, 2021 (version 2)
Copyright
© 2021, Troiano 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
-
- 1,893
- Page views
-
- 289
- Downloads
-
- 17
- Citations
Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.
Download links
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)
Further reading
-
- Plant Biology
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.
-
- Ecology
- Plant Biology
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.