Group 1 REM hampers PlAMV-GFP cell-to-cell propagation and REM1.2 diffusion increases upon infection
A. Box plots of the mean area of PlAMV-GFP infection foci in rem1.2, rem1.3, rem1.4 single mutants along with rem1.2 rem1.3 double mutant and rem1.2 rem1.3 rem1.4 triple mutant. Three independent biological repeats were performed, with at least 36 foci per experiment and per genotype. Significant differences were revealed using a One-Way ANOVA followed by a Tukey’s multiple comparison test. Letters are used to discriminate between statistically different conditions (p<0.05).
B. Box plots of the mean cumulated intensity measured in infected leaves in Col-0 and rem1.2 rem1.3 rem1.4 during systemic viral propagation. Two independent experiments were conducted. Statistical significance of the difference between Col-0 and rem1.2 rem1.3 rem1.4 at each time point was assessed using a Mann-Whitney test. *: p<0.05, **: p<0.01
C. Representative images of A. thaliana plants infected with PlAMV-GFP and imaged with a CCD Camera from 10 to 17 dpi. Systemic leaves are circled with a white dotted line. Multicolored scale is used to enhance contrast and ranges from blue (low intensity) to red (high intensity). Scale bar = 4 cm.
D. Confocal images of the surface view of A. thaliana epidermal cells of the Col-0/ProUbi10:mRFP1.2-REM1.2, infiltrated either with free GFP (“mock”) or PlAMV-GFP. Scale bar = 5µm
E. Representative trajectories of Col-0/ProUbi10:mEOS3.2-REM1.2 five days after infiltration with free GFP (“mock”) or PlAMV-GFP. Scale bar = 2µm
F. Distribution of the diffusion coefficient (D), represented as log(D) for Col-0/ProUbi10:mEOS3.2-REM1.2 five days after infiltration with free GFP (“mock”) or PlAMV-GFP. Data were acquired from at least 16 cells over the course of three independent experiments.
G. Box plot of the mean peak value extracted from the Gaussian fit of log(D) distribution. Significant difference was revealed using a Mann-Whitney test. *: p<0.05.
H. Mean square displacement (MSD) over time of Col-0/ProUbi10:mEOS3.2-REM1.2 infiltrated either with free GFP (“mock”) or PlAMV-GFP. Representative trajectories extracted from Figure 4E illustrate each curve. Scale bar=1µm.
I. Voronoi tessellation illustration of Col-0/ProUbi10:mEOS3.2-REM1.2 five days after infiltration with free GFP (“mock”) or PlAMV-GFP. ND are circled in red. Scale bar = 2µm
J. Distribution of the ND diameter of Col-0/ProUbi10:mEOS3.2-REM1.2 five days after infiltration with free GFP (“mock”) or PlAMV-GFP.
K. Box plot representing the mean peak value of ND diameter extracted from the Gaussian fit of Figure 4J. No significant difference was revealed using a Mann-Whitney test.
L. Boxplot of the proportion of Col-0/ProUbi10:mEOS3.2-REM1.2 detections found in ND five days after infiltration with free GFP (“mock”) or PlAMV-GFP. No significant difference was revealed using a Mann-Whitney test.