2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2020.01.013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Co-incidence of Damage and Microbial Patterns Controls Localized Immune Responses in Roots

Abstract: Graphical Abstract Highlights d Arabidopsis roots request cell damage to mount a strong, localized immune response d Damaged cells upregulate pattern-recognition receptor expression in their neighbors d Endodermal barriers compartmentalize immune responses in differentiated cell-types d Damage-gating can minimize immune responses against non-pathogenic root colonizers

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

13
200
1
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 211 publications
(235 citation statements)
references
References 77 publications
13
200
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The observed redundancy of Fo effectors targeting the same process implied that interference with this process is a crucial element in host colonisation by this vascular pathogen. Intriguingly, a recent study revealed highly localised and damage-dependent activation of PTI in Arabidopsis roots (Zhou et al, 2020). Initial root surface colonisation by Fo is followed by its invasion of the xylem vessels that is likely to result in plant tissue damage and thus PTI activation, explaining the necessity for these PTI-suppressing effectors.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The observed redundancy of Fo effectors targeting the same process implied that interference with this process is a crucial element in host colonisation by this vascular pathogen. Intriguingly, a recent study revealed highly localised and damage-dependent activation of PTI in Arabidopsis roots (Zhou et al, 2020). Initial root surface colonisation by Fo is followed by its invasion of the xylem vessels that is likely to result in plant tissue damage and thus PTI activation, explaining the necessity for these PTI-suppressing effectors.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The concept of PTI and its suppression by intracellularly acting effectors is largely based on the study of foliar pathogens. Roots are exposed to both beneficial and pathogenic microbes, a condition that has likely shaped the immune system in roots (De Coninck et al, 2015;Hacquard et al, 2017;Zhou et al, 2020). Currently, it is poorly understood which type of defence responses are activated in roots, and whether root pathogens use similar mechanisms for their suppression as those employed in aboveground interactions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3b). Recent work showed that MAMP responsiveness in germ-free roots was gated by the expression of damage-induced PRRs 35 . However, the sustained expression of FLS2 (c1) in the presence of SynComs indicates that RGI suppression is not due to FLS2 downregulation ( Fig.…”
Section: Root Transcriptomic Changes and Dampening Of Immunity By Supmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If pathogens can overcome preformed plant barriers (cuticle, cell wall) or even be sensed before [1], the so-called first line of defense is activated. Here, Pattern Recognition Receptors (PRRs) at the plasma membrane (PM) recognize conserved pathogen or microbial signatures (Pathogen-Associated Molecular Patterns (PAMPs)).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%