GLO-Roots: an imaging platform enabling multidimensional characterization of soil-grown root systems

  1. Rubén Rellán-Álvarez
  2. Guillaume Lobet
  3. Heike Lindner
  4. Pierre-Luc Pradier
  5. Jose Sebastian
  6. Muh-Ching Yee
  7. Yu Geng
  8. Charlotte Trontin
  9. Therese LaRue
  10. Amanda Schrager-Lavelle
  11. Cara H Haney
  12. Rita Nieu
  13. Julin Maloof
  14. John P Vogel
  15. José R Dinneny  Is a corresponding author
  1. Centro de Investigación y de Estudios Avanzados del Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Mexico
  2. University of Liège, Belgium
  3. Carnegie Institution for Science, United States
  4. United States Department of Agriculture, United States
  5. Stanford University, United States
  6. University of California, Davis, United States
  7. Harvard Medical School, United States
  8. Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute, United States

Abstract

Root systems develop different root types that individually sense cues from their local environment and integrate this information with systemic signals. This complex multi-dimensional amalgam of inputs enables continuous adjustment of root growth rates, direction and metabolic activity that define a dynamic physical network. Current methods for analyzing root biology balance physiological relevance with imaging capability. To bridge this divide, we developed an integrated imaging system called Growth and Luminescence Observatory for Roots (GLO-Roots) that uses luminescence-based reporters to enable studies of root architecture and gene expression patterns in soil-grown, light-shielded roots. We have developed image analysis algorithms that allow the spatial integration of soil properties, gene expression and root system architecture traits. We propose GLO-Roots as a system that has great utility in presenting environmental stimuli to roots in ways that evoke natural adaptive responses and in providing tools for studying the multi-dimensional nature of such processes.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Rubén Rellán-Álvarez

    Unidad de Genómica Avanzada, Laboratorio Nacional de Genómica para la Biodiversidad, Centro de Investigación y de Estudios Avanzados del Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Irapuato, Mexico
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Guillaume Lobet

    PhytoSystems, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Heike Lindner

    Department of Plant Biology, Carnegie Institution for Science, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Pierre-Luc Pradier

    Boyce Thompson Institute for Plant Research, United States Department of Agriculture, Ithaca, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Jose Sebastian

    Department of Plant Biology, Carnegie Institution for Science, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Muh-Ching Yee

    Department of Plant Biology, Carnegie Institution for Science, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Yu Geng

    Department of Plant Biology, Carnegie Institution for Science, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Charlotte Trontin

    Department of Plant Biology, Carnegie Institution for Science, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Therese LaRue

    Department of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Amanda Schrager-Lavelle

    Department of Plant Biology, University of California, Davis, Davis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Cara H Haney

    Department of Genetics, Department of Molecular Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Rita Nieu

    Western Regional Research Center, United States Department of Agriculture, Albany, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Julin Maloof

    Department of Plant Biology, University of California, Davis, Davis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. John P Vogel

    Department of Energy, Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute, Walnut Creek, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. José R Dinneny

    Department of Plant Biology, Carnegie Institution for Science, Stanford, United States
    For correspondence
    jdinneny@carnegiescience.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Maria J Harrison, Boyce Thompson Institute for Plant Research, United States

Version history

  1. Received: March 23, 2015
  2. Accepted: August 18, 2015
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: August 19, 2015 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: October 1, 2015 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2015, Rellán-Álvarez 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

  • 12,312
    views
  • 2,280
    downloads
  • 168
    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. Rubén Rellán-Álvarez
  2. Guillaume Lobet
  3. Heike Lindner
  4. Pierre-Luc Pradier
  5. Jose Sebastian
  6. Muh-Ching Yee
  7. Yu Geng
  8. Charlotte Trontin
  9. Therese LaRue
  10. Amanda Schrager-Lavelle
  11. Cara H Haney
  12. Rita Nieu
  13. Julin Maloof
  14. John P Vogel
  15. José R Dinneny
(2015)
GLO-Roots: an imaging platform enabling multidimensional characterization of soil-grown root systems
eLife 4:e07597.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.07597

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.07597

Further reading

    1. Plant Biology
    Ivan Kulich, Julia Schmid ... Jiří Friml
    Research Article

    Root gravitropic bending represents a fundamental aspect of terrestrial plant physiology. Gravity is perceived by sedimentation of starch-rich plastids (statoliths) to the bottom of the central root cap cells. Following gravity perception, intercellular auxin transport is redirected downwards leading to an asymmetric auxin accumulation at the lower root side causing inhibition of cell expansion, ultimately resulting in downwards bending. How gravity-induced statoliths repositioning is translated into asymmetric auxin distribution remains unclear despite PIN auxin efflux carriers and the Negative Gravitropic Response of roots (NGR) proteins polarize along statolith sedimentation, thus providing a plausible mechanism for auxin flow redirection. In this study, using a functional NGR1-GFP construct, we visualized the NGR1 localization on the statolith surface and plasma membrane (PM) domains in close proximity to the statoliths, correlating with their movements. We determined that NGR1 binding to these PM domains is indispensable for NGR1 functionality and relies on cysteine acylation and adjacent polybasic regions as well as on lipid and sterol PM composition. Detailed timing of the early events following graviperception suggested that both NGR1 repolarization and initial auxin asymmetry precede the visible PIN3 polarization. This discrepancy motivated us to unveil a rapid, NGR-dependent translocation of PIN-activating AGCVIII kinase D6PK towards lower PMs of gravity-perceiving cells, thus providing an attractive model for rapid redirection of auxin fluxes following gravistimulation.

    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.