The salicylic acid (SA) regulatory gene HOPW1-1-INTERACTING3 (WIN3) was previously shown to confer resistance to the biotrophic pathogen Pseudomonas syringae. Here, we report that WIN3 controls broad-spectrum disease resistance to the necrotrophic pathogen Botrytis cinerea and contributes to basal defense induced by flg22, a 22-amino acid peptide derived from the conserved region of bacterial flagellin proteins. Genetic analysis indicates that WIN3 acts additively with several known SA regulators, including PHYTOALEXIN DEFICIENT4, NONEXPRESSOR OF PR GENES1 (NPR1), and SA INDUCTION-DEFICIENT2, in regulating SA accumulation, cell death, and/or disease resistance in the Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) mutant acd6-1. Interestingly, expression of WIN3 is also dependent on these SA regulators and can be activated by cell death, suggesting that WIN3-mediated signaling is interconnected with those derived from other SA regulators and cell death. Surprisingly, we found that WIN3 and NPR1 synergistically affect flowering time via influencing the expression of flowering regulatory genes FLOWERING LOCUS C and FLOWERING LOCUS T. Taken together, our data reveal that WIN3 represents a novel node in the SA signaling networks to regulate plant defense and flowering time. They also highlight that plant innate immunity and development are closely connected processes, precise regulation of which should be important for the fitness of plants.

Precise cell-cycle control is critical for plant development and responses to pathogen invasion. Two homologous cyclindependent kinase inhibitor genes, SIAMESE (SIM) and SIM-RELATED 1 (SMR1), were recently shown to regulate Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) defense based on phenotypes conferred by a sim smr1 double mutant. However, whether these two genes play differential roles in cell-cycle and defense control is unknown. In this report, we show that while acting synergistically to promote endoreplication, SIM and SMR1 play different roles in affecting the ploidy of trichome and leaf cells, respectively. In addition, we found that the smr1-1 mutant, but not sim-1, was more susceptible to a virulent Pseudomonas syringae strain, and this susceptibility could be rescued by activating salicylic acid (SA)-mediated defense. Consistent with these results, smr1-1 partially suppressed the dwarfism, high SA levels, and cell death phenotypes in acd6-1, a mutant used to gauge the change of defense levels. Thus, SMR1 functions partly through SA in defense control. The differential roles of SIM and SMR1 are due to differences in temporal and spatial expression of these two genes in Arabidopsis tissues and in response to P. syringae infection. In addition, flow-cytometry analysis of plants with altered SA signaling revealed that SA is necessary, but not sufficient, to change cell-cycle progression. We further found that a mutant with three CYCD3 genes disrupted also compromised disease resistance to P. syringae. Together, this study reveals differential roles of two homologous cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors in regulating cell-cycle progression and innate immunity in Arabidopsis and provides insights into the importance of cell-cycle control during host-pathogen interactions.

Plant-pathogen interactions involve sophisticated action and counteraction strategies from both parties. Plants can recognize pathogen derived molecules, such as conserved pathogen associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) and effector proteins, and subsequently activate PAMP-triggered immunity (PTI) and effector-triggered immunity (ETI), respectively. However, pathogens can evade such recognitions and suppress host immunity with effectors, causing effector-triggered susceptibility (ETS). The differences among PTI, ETS, and ETI have not been completely understood. Toward a better understanding of PTI, ETS, and ETI, we systematically examined various defense-related phenotypes of Arabidopsis infected with different Pseudomonas syringae pv. maculicola ES4326 strains, using the virulence strain DG3 to induce ETS, the avirulence strain DG34 that expresses avrRpm1 (recognized by the resistance protein RPM1) to induce ETI, and HrcC- that lacks the type three secretion system to activate PTI. We found that plants infected with different strains displayed dynamic differences in the accumulation of the defense signaling molecule salicylic acid, expression of the defense marker gene PR1, cell death formation, and accumulation/localization of the reactive oxygen species, H2O2. The differences between PTI, ETS, and ETI are dependent on the doses of the strains used. These data support the quantitative nature of PTI, ETS, and ETI and they also reveal qualitative differences between PTI, ETS, and ETI. Interestingly, we observed the induction of large cells in the infected leaves, most obviously with HrcC- at later infection stages. The enlarged cells have increased DNA content, suggesting a possible activation of endoreplication. Consistent with strong induction of abnormal cell growth by HrcC-, we found that the PTI elicitor flg22 also activates abnormal cell growth, depending on a functional flg22-receptor FLS2. Thus, our study has revealed a comprehensive picture of dynamic changes of defense phenotypes and cell fate determination during Arabidopsis-P. syringae interactions, contributing to a better understanding of plant defense mechanisms.

Erwinia amylovora is the causal agent of the fire blight disease in some plants of the Rosaceae family. The non-host plant Arabidopsis serves as a powerful system for the dissection of mechanisms of resistance to E. amylovora. Although not yet known to mount gene-for-gene resistance to E. amylovora, we found that Arabidopsis activated strong defence signalling mediated by salicylic acid (SA), with kinetics and amplitude similar to that induced by the recognition of the bacterial effector avrRpm1 by the resistance protein RPM1. Genetic analysis further revealed that SA signalling, but not signalling mediated by ethylene (ET) and jasmonic acid (JA), is required for E. amylovora resistance. Erwinia amylovora induces massive callose deposition on infected leaves, which is independent of SA, ET and JA signalling and is necessary for E. amylovora resistance in Arabidopsis. We also observed tumour-like growths on E. amylovora-infected Arabidopsis leaves, which contain enlarged mesophyll cells with increased DNA content and are probably a result of endoreplication. The formation of such growths is largely independent of SA signalling and some E. amylovora effectors. Together, our data reveal signalling requirements for E. amylovora-induced disease resistance, callose deposition and cell fate change in the non-host plant Arabidopsis. Knowledge from this study could facilitate a better understanding of the mechanisms of host defence against E. amylovora and eventually improve host resistance to the pathogen.