No abstract

Plant cells have two defense systems that detect bacterial pathogens. One is a basal defense system that recognizes complex pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs). A second system uses disease-resistance (R) proteins to recognize type lll effector proteins that are delivered into the plant cell by the pathogen's type III secretion system. Here we show that these two pathways are linked. We find that two Pseudomonas syringae type III effectors, AvrRpt2 and AvrRpm1, inhibit PAMP-induced signaling and thus compromise the host's basal defense system. RIN4 is an Arabidopsis protein targeted by AvrRpt2 and AvrRpm1 for degradation and phosphorylation, respectively. We find that RIN4 is itself a regulator of PAMP signaling. The R proteins, RPS2 and RPM1, sense type III effector-induced perturbations of RIN4. Thus, R proteins guard the plant against type III effectors that inhibit PAMP signaling and provide a mechanistic link between the two plant defense systems.

Although mutated forms of ras are not associated with the majority of breast cancers (<5%), there is considerable experimental evidence that hyperactive Ras can promote breast cancer growth and development. Therefore, we determined whether Ras and Ras-responsive signaling pathways were activated persistently in nine widely studied human breast cancer cell lines. Although only two of the lines harbor mutationally activated ras, we found that five of nine breast cancer cell lines showed elevated active Ras-GTP levels that may be due, in part, to HER2 activation. Unexpectedly, activation of two key Ras effector pathways, the extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) mitogen-activated protein kinase and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/AKT signaling pathways, was not always associated with Ras activation. Ras activation also did not correlate with invasion or the expression of proteins associated with tumor cell invasion (estrogen receptor ␣ and cyclooxygenase 2). We then examined the role of Ras signaling in mediating resistance to matrix deprivationinduced apoptosis (anoikis). Surprisingly, we found that ERK and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/AKT activation did not have significant roles in conferring anoikis resistance. Taken together, these observations show that Ras signaling exhibits significant cell context variations and that other effector pathways may be important for Ras-mediated oncogenesis, as well as for anoikis resistance, in breast cancer. Additionally, because ERK and AKT activation are not strictly associated with Ras activation, pharmacological inhibitors of these two signaling pathways may not be the best approach for inhibition of aberrant Ras function in breast cancer treatment.

No abstract

SummaryPlants encode a sophisticated innate immune system. Resistance against potential pathogens often relies on active responses. Prerequisite to the induction of defences is recognition of the pathogenic threat. Significant advances have been made in our understanding of the non-self molecules that are recognized by plants and the means by which plants perceive them. Established terms describing these recognition events, including microbe-associated molecular pattern (MAMP), MAMP-receptor, effector, and resistance (R) protein, need clarification to represent our current knowledge adequately. In this review we propose criteria to classify inducers of plant defence as either MAMPs or microbe-induced molecular patterns (MIMPs). We refine the definition of MAMP to mean a molecular sequence or structure in ANY pathogen-derived molecule that is perceived via direct interaction with a host defence receptor. MIMPs are modifications of host-derived molecules that are induced by an intrinsic activity of a pathogen-derived effector and are perceived by a host defence receptor. MAMP-receptors have previously been classified separately from R-proteins as a discrete class of surveillance molecules. However, MAMP-receptors and R-proteins cannot be distinguished on the basis of their protein structures or their induced responses. We propose that MAMP-receptors and MIMP-receptors are each a subset of R-proteins. Although our review is based on examples from plant pathogens and plants, the principles discussed might prove applicable to other organisms.

The syndecan family of cell surface proteoglycans regulates cell adhesion and growth factor signaling by binding components of the extracellular matrix and growth factors. To date, all known ligand interactions are via the covalently attached glycosaminoglycan chains. To assay for potential extracellular interactions via the core proteins directly, the recombinant extracellular domain of syndecan-4 (S4ED), one of the four syndecan family members, was tested as a substratum for the attachment of mammalian cells. Human foreskin fibroblasts bind to mouse S4ED, and both mouse and chicken S4ED can block this binding, with 50% inhibition observed between 0.1 and 1 ؋ 10 ؊7 M. The extracellular domain of another syndecan family member, syndecan-1, fails to compete for cell binding to mouse S4ED. Amino acids 56 -109 of the 120-amino acid mouse S4ED compete fully, suggesting that the cell binding domain is within this region. The ability of syndecan-4 to interact with molecules at the cell surface via its core protein as well as its glycosaminoglycan chains may uniquely regulate the formation of cell surface signaling complexes following engagement of this proteoglycan with its extracellular ligands.

Fibroblast growth factors (FGFs) are a family of nine proteins that bind to three distinct types of cell surface molecules: (i) FGF receptor tyrosine kinases (FGFR-1 through FGFR-4); (ii) a cysteine-rich FGF receptor (CFR); and (iii) heparan sulfate proteoglycans (HSPGs). Signaling by FGFs requires participation of at least two of these receptors: the FGFRs and HSPGs form a signaling complex. The length and sulfation pattern of the heparan sulfate chain determines both the activity of the signaling complex and, in part, the ligand specificity for FGFR-1. Thus, the heparan sulfate proteoglycans are likely to play an essential role in signaling. We have recently identified a role for FGF in limb bud development in vivo. In the chick limb bud, ectopic expression of the 18 kDa form of FGF-2 or FGF-2 fused to an artificial signal peptide at its amino terminus causes skeletal duplications. These data, and the observations that FGF-2 is localized to the subjacent mesoderm and the apical ectodermal ridge in the early developing limb, suggest that FGF-2 plays an important role in limb outgrowth. We propose that FGF-2 is an apical ectodermal ridge-derived factor that participates in limb outgrowth and patterning.

The syndecan family of cell surface proteoglycans regulates cell adhesion via their glycosaminoglycan chains and discrete domains of their core proteins. Core protein domains that are variable between syndecan family members may regulate syndecan-specific associations, thereby endowing individual syndecans with unique functions. A syndecan-4-specific domain has been identified in the extracellular syndecan-4 protein. This region mediates cell adhesion when provided as an artificial substratum and is localized within amino acids 56 -109 of the recombinant extracellular protein domain of mouse syndecan-4 (mS4ED) (McFall, A. J., and Rapraeger, A. C. (1997) J. Biol. Chem. 272, 12901-12904). To characterize its interaction with the cell surface, radiolabeled ligand binding studies were performed. A single high affinity interaction, with a dissociation constant of 2 ؋ 10 ؊9 M, was observed between mS4ED and both human and mouse cells. Both chicken S4ED and mS4ED compete for this interaction, although they are only 34% identical within the cell-binding domain sequence. The extracellular protein domains of syndecan-1, -2, and -3, however, fail to compete. The interaction is also observed with native syndecan-4 shed from cell surfaces. Interestingly, the extracellular protein domain of syndecan-1 also mediates cell adhesion, suggesting a similar but discrete interaction for this family member.The syndecan family of cell surface proteoglycans contains four vertebrate members, syndecans 1-4, that regulate cell adhesion, growth factor signaling, and maintenance of cell morphology (1-3). They do so via interactions with the glycosaminoglycan chains which decorate the syndecan core proteins and the core proteins themselves. Most cells express multiple syndecan family members, suggesting that the individual syndecan proteins, which are distinct gene products, are likely to have unique functions (4).The syndecan proteins can be divided into three domains. These are (i) a short cytoplasmic domain about 30 amino acids long, (ii) a single transmembrane domain, and (iii) an extracellular domain that is modified by the addition of heparan sulfate glycosaminoglycan chains. Within these domains are both conserved and variable regions. Conserved regions have the potential to mediate functions shared by all syndecan family members. For example, the cytoplasmic domains of all known syndecans contain the C-terminal sequence EFYA which has recently been shown to interact with syntenin, a novel PDZ domain-containing protein (5). This association has the potential to link the syndecans to both structural and signaling pathways within the cell (6). The transmembrane domains of the syndecans are also homologous and are likely to contribute to the shared ability of all syndecan core proteins to homodimerize and potentially multimerize (1,7,8).In contrast to conserved regions within the syndecan core proteins, variable regions are candidates for unique, or syndecan-specific, interactions. One variable region of the syndecans is found within the ...