Next Article in Journal
The In Silico Characterization of Monocotyledonous α-l-Arabinofuranosidases on the Example of Maize
Previous Article in Journal
Gender Specificities of Cardiac Troponin Serum Levels: From Formation Mechanisms to the Diagnostic Role in Case of Acute Coronary Syndrome
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Life
Volume 13
Issue 2
10.3390/life13020268
life-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Characteristics, Roles and Applications of Proteinaceous Elicitors from Pathogens in Plant Immunity

by
Zhangqun Li
1,2,*,
Junnan Liu
3,
Wenting Ma
3 and
Xiaofang Li
1,2
1
School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Taizhou University, Taizhou 318000, China
2
Institute of Biopharmaceuticals, Taizhou University, Taizhou 318000, China
3
School of Life Science, Taizhou University, Taizhou 318000, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Life 2023, 13(2), 268; https://doi.org/10.3390/life13020268
Submission received: 3 January 2023 / Revised: 15 January 2023 / Accepted: 15 January 2023 / Published: 18 January 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Plant Science)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
In interactions between pathogens and plants, pathogens secrete many molecules that facilitate plant infection, and some of these compounds are recognized by plant pattern recognition receptors (PRRs), which induce immune responses. Molecules in both pathogens and plants that trigger immune responses in plants are termed elicitors. On the basis of their chemical content, elicitors can be classified into carbohydrates, lipopeptides, proteinaceous compounds and other types. Although many studies have focused on the involvement of elicitors in plants, especially on pathophysiological changes induced by elicitors in plants and the mechanisms mediating these changes, there is a lack of up-to-date reviews on the characteristics and functions of proteinaceous elicitors. In this mini-review, we provide an overview of the up-to-date knowledge on several important families of pathogenic proteinaceous elicitors (i.e., harpins, necrosis- and ethylene-inducing peptide 1 (nep1)-like proteins (NLPs) and elicitins), focusing mainly on their structures, characteristics and effects on plants, specifically on their roles in plant immune responses. A solid understanding of elicitors may be helpful to decrease the use of agrochemicals in agriculture and gardening, generate more resistant germplasms and increase crop yields.

1. Introduction

Plants, the main nutrient sources for humans, are attacked by many pathogens that can consume them, devastating yields and causing economic losses, which make pathogen infection among the most formidable challenges to global food security. To reduce crop loss, many chemical bactericides and fungicides have been used to prevent or treat diseases caused by pathogens. However, in addition to inducing toxicity in pathogens, these conventional agrochemicals pose hazards to the environment and human health [1]. Furthermore, continuous applications of conventional germicides may fail because of the emergence of resistant pathogens. Recent advances in the study of plant innate immunity, especially plant-pathogen interactions, have shown that elicitors can trigger immune responses in plants that lead to intense and persistent resistance to pathogens [2,3,4,5,6]. The application of elicitors seems to be an attractive and promising method for treating agricultural pathogens in a green and environmentally friendly manner.
Advances in research into plant innate immunity have revealed that plants employ a multilayered surveillance system to detect and respond to pathogen invasion. According to the typical zigzag model, there are two layers in plant innate immunity: namely, pattern-triggered immunity (PTI) and effector-triggered immunity (ETI) [7]. In PTI, plant pattern recognition receptors (PRRs) on the plasma membrane recognize pathogen-/microbe-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs/MAMPs) and trigger subsequent immune responses, such as membrane depolarization, calcium influx, a spike in reactive oxygen species (ROS) levels, activation of mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) cascades, induction of pathogenesis-related (PR) gene expression and callose deposition [3]. PAMPs/MAMPs are highly conserved molecular signatures, including peptides such as flagellin (flg22) and elongation factor Tu (EF-Tu, elf18) from bacteria, elicitins from oomycetes, coat proteins and RNA replicases from virus, carbohydrates such as chitin from fungi and peptidoglycan (PGN) from bacteria, and ceramides such as Pi-Cer D from oomycetes. To suppress plant PTI and facilitate invasion, many pathogens have evolved PTI-suppressive mechanisms termed effector-triggered susceptibility (ETS). To prevent and survive pathogen invasion, plants recognize effectors by nucleotide binding (NB) and leucine-rich repeat (LRR) proteins and induce robust ETI, causing hypersensitive cell death (HR). New effectors and NB-LRR proteins evolved to induce new ETI again [7]. Associations between PTI and ETI have been reported by several excellent studies. PTI and ETI share several metabolites, e.g., glutathione and neodiosmin and signaling pathways, e.g., ROS spike, Ca2+ burst, activation of MAPK cascades and phytohormone pathways [8,9,10].
Elicitors can be classified into endogenous and exogenous categories according to their origins (Table 1). Endogenous elicitors, such as oligo-galacturonic acid and xylan fragments from the plant cell wall, are generated by host plants. Exogenous elicitors, such as chitin, β-glucan, lipopolysaccharide (LPS), harpins, elicitins, virus coat proteins and RNA replicases are produced by pathogens. According to their chemical properties, elicitors can be classified into proteinaceous, carbohydrate, chemical-inducing elicitors, and so on. Exogenous proteinaceous elicitors are proteinaceous elicitors from microorganisms, especially pathogens, and they are involved in many processes, such as the virulence of pathogens, abiotic stresses and biotic stresses in plants [11,12,13,14,15]. Although many studies and reviews have focused their attention on the involvement of proteinaceous elicitors in plant innate immunity and abiotic stresses in past decades, there is a lack of up-to-date reviews on the characteristics and functions of proteinaceous elicitors. In this mini review, we mainly focus on the sources and properties of several important kinds of exogenous proteinaceous elicitors (i.e., harpin, NLPs and elicitins), their involvement and signaling mechanisms in the immune responses in plants and discuss how to apply this knowledge to improve abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in crop plants.

2. Harpins

2.1. Architectures and Functions of Harpins

Harpins, the first identified cell-free elicitor causing a hypersensitive response (HR) from Gram-negative plant-pathogenic bacteria, are an important type of elicitor that is involved in the interaction between plants and pathogens. They function in many physiological responses in microbes and abiotic and biotic stresses in plants, e.g., working as virulence factors in the invasion of bacterial pathogens into a host, inducing HR and non-HR immunity in plants and promoting plant growth [16,17,18,19]. Harpins are elicitors with approximately 10–60 kDa, encoded by sequences located in the hypersensitive response and pathogenicity (hrp) gene cluster and released through the type III secretion system [16,20]. Most harpins are acidic, hydrophilic, and thermostable and are sensitive to chemically denaturing proteins because of their distinctive sequences and architectures [16,19,20,21,22]. Harpins are enriched with glycine and serine but carry few aromatic amino acids and low levels of cysteine, which is an amino acid that contributes to disulfide bonds. The level of glycine exceeds 15% in most harpins, and these glycine residues cluster in specific protein regions [16]. Harpins usually carry many (from two to nine) α-helixes, and most do not harbor domains similar to other proteins in bacteria or plants, which makes them good elicitors in plants [16,23,24,25].
Since the first harpin, HrpN (sometimes called HrpNea) was identified in the fire blight pathogen Erwinia amylovora, a devasting pathogen in the Rosaceae family, numerous studies have focused on the functions and signaling pathways induced by harpins in plants [14,18,20,26,27,28,29,30]. The types of immunity primed by harpins include the common HR, through which harpin immunity was discovered, and non-HR immunity (Table 2). Typical HR-related cell death and non-HR defense responses, such as bursts in ROS production and increased expression of pathogenesis-related genes, callose deposition and phytohormone production, have been observed in harpin-treated plants [14,31,32,33,34].

2.2. Action Mechanisms Triggered by Harpins in Plants

Several possible explanations for harpin-induced HR are discussed herein. First, normal physiological cell membrane functions may be disrupted by harpins. Specifically, harpins bind to the plasma membrane of plant cells, which activates subsequent immune responses, and several harpins, such as HrpZPsph and PopA, form pores in the plasma membrane that enable ion conduction [25,35,36,37]. Second, mitochondrial function may be indirectly/directly disrupted by harpins, triggering mitochondrion-dependent programmed cell death in plants; for example, mitochondrial electron transport was inhibited by HrpN, which reduced ATP synthesis in tobacco. HrpZ1 induced the rapid release of cytochrome c from mitochondria into the cytosol, which led to the accumulation of ROS in Arabidopsis thaliana. RipX (previously named PopA) interacts with mitochondrial ATP synthase F1 subunit alpha (ATPA) and represses the transcription of atpA in Nicotiana benthamiana [29,38,39]. Third, harpins induce the expression of HR-related genes and activate MAPK signaling cascades [19,33,40,41,42].
Several membrane-localized harpin targets in plants have been identified, and their discovery has clarified harpin mechanisms of action. For example, a small transmembrane protein in apple (Malus x domestica) HrpN-interacting protein from Malus (HIPM) and its homologue in Arabidopsis (AtHIPM) have been found to interact with the harpin HrpN, and this interaction has been shown to be critical to susceptibility to E. amylovora [28,43]. The N-terminal 198 amino acids of HrpN were required for the HrpN protein interaction with HIPM. Further physiological analyses showed that the atHIPM knockout mutant was slightly larger than the wild type. All these results indicated that AtHIPM negatively regulates HrpN functions [28]. HIPM also interacts with oxygen-evolving enhancer-like protein (MdOEE), which may affect photosynthesis and subsequent ROS production [43]. The HIPM induction of this signaling axis may explain the mechanism through which harpins affect plant growth and immunity. In addition to HIPM, plasma membrane intrinsic protein (PIP) is a plasma membrane harpin sensor. The aquaporin AtPIP1;4, which is involved in the translocation of H2O2 from apoplasts to the cytoplasm to induce subsequent immune responses and membrane permeability of CO2 and H2O, functions as a sensor of Hpa1 in A. thaliana. Upon Hpa1 treatment, the interaction between Hpa1 and AtPIP1;4 led to increased photosynthesis to promote plant growth, suggesting that harpins induce the AtPIP1;4 signaling pathway to promote plant growth and trigger immune responses [26,44].

2.3. Plant Response to Harpins Promotes Biotic and Abiotic Resistance and Growth

Treatment with harpins contributes to pathogen resistance in plants (Table 2), which is an attribute with practical usefulness in agriculture. For example, the application of Messenger (a commercial product that contains Harpin (Ea) as the main active component), harpin (Axiom, Rx Green Technologies) and HpaXpm reduced the severity of diseases caused by Phytophthora infestans and Botrytis cinerea, Pythium aphanidermatum, and Tobacco mosaic virus (TMV) in tomato, hemp seedlings, and tobacco, respectively [14,19,45,46]. Transgenic plants expressing harpins, e.g., transgenic soybean expressing hrpZpsta from P. syringae pv. tabaci and hrf2 from Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzicola, tobacco expressing ripX and hpa1, and transgenic cotton expressing hpa1Xoo from X. oryzae pv. oryzae have shown increased immune responses [29,30,31,47,48].
In addition to increases in immune responses and pathogen resistance, harpins induce other physiological activities, such as growth and development, tolerance to drought and high salinity (Table 2) [31,49,50,51,52,53,54]. Specifically, treatment with HpaXpm promoted increased root length and fresh weight in A. thaliana, and the expression of SSBXoc and Hpa1 in N. benthamiana promoted increased root length and plant growth [19,31,49]. This harpin-promoted growth may have been related to an increase in photosynthesis due to increased chlorophyll levels, CO2 conduction rates, and greater changes in the levels of phytohormones, e.g., ethylene (ET), gibberellin (GA), and salicylic acid (SA) [14,18,26,27,31,53]. Notably, exogenous PopW (a harpin from Ralstonia solanacearum ZJ3721) treatment led to greater drought resistance in Medicago sativa L. and tomato, and this effect was related to multiple mechanisms, such as the action of phytohormones, e.g., abscisic acid (ABA), GA, SA, and drought-related gene expression [15,52].
A particular partial harpin sequence has been shown to be sufficient for harpin function, although fragments are different in different harpins. Specifically, three heptads in the N-terminal coiled-coil domain of Hpa1 from X. oryzae pv. Oryzae, a 23-amino acid fragment of HpaG from Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. glycines, a 24-amino acid peptide in the HrpZ protein of P. syringae, were sufficient to initiate HR in plants [31,55,56]. Further studies showed that this particular segment of harpins induced a more robust response than that induced by harpins [22]. All these results suggest that certain harpin sequences are essential for the plant response, which may indicate that these elicitors can be leveraged to induce plant resistance to pathogens.
Different harpins show antagonistic effects. For example, HrpW(ea) from E. amylovora administered at subnanomolar concentrations decreased the defense responses that had been triggered by another harpin from this bacterium, HrpN(ea). This result may be attributable to the opposing anion channel changes triggered by HrpW(ea) and HrpN(ea) [57].
Studies have mainly focused on the architectures of harpins and the functions and action mechanisms involved in microbes and host plants for 30 years. Practical application of harpins has been successful; i.e., Messenger was registered in the United States and allowed to use on all crops in 2000; now, it has been used in many countries. More effective harpins remain to be used efficiently in practice and play more roles in agriculture and gardening.
Table
Table 2. Involvement of proteinaceous elicitors in immune responses and abiotic resistance in plants.
Table 2. Involvement of proteinaceous elicitors in immune responses and abiotic resistance in plants.
GroupsElicitors/MicrobesPlantsTreatmentsPhytohormonesHRIncrease Resistance to PathogensGrowthAbiotic ResistanceReferences
HarpinHarpin/Erwinia amylovoraN. benthamianainfiltration-yes---[20]
HarpinPsph/Pseudomonas syringae pv. phaseolicolaN. benthamianainfiltration-yes---[35]
PopW/Ralstonia
solanacearum		Medicago sativa L.-ABA, GA, JA, SA, IAA---drought[52]
Hpa1/Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzaeN. benthamianaagrobacterium-mediated transformation-yes
(infiltration)		yesyesdrought[31]
PopW/Ralstonia solanacearumSolanum lycopersicum L.foliar applicationABA---drought[15]
RipX(PopA)/Ralstonia solanacearumN. benthamianainfiltration-yes---[29]
HpaXpm/Xanthomonas
phaseoli pv. manihotis		N. benthamianainfiltration-yesyes
(spraying)		--[19]
HpaXpm/Xanthomonas
phaseoli pv. manihotis		A. thalianasoak---yes-[19]
SSBXoc/X. oryzae
pv. oryzicola		N. benthamianaagrobacterium-mediated transformation--yesyessalt[49]
HrpZpsta/P.
syringae pv. tabaci		Glycine maxagrobacterium-mediated transformation--yes--[47]
NLPsCgNLP1/Colletotrichum gloeosporioidesA. thalianaagrobacterium-mediated transformation---yes--[58]
BsNep1/Botrytis squamosaN. benthamianainfiltration--yes---[59]
BcNep1/Botrytis cinereaAllium cepainfiltration--yes---[59]
VmNLP2/Valsa maliN. benthamianaagroinfiltration--yes---[11]
VmNLP2/Valsa maliappleinfiltration--yes---[11]
PiNPP1.1/ Phytophthora infestansN. benthamianaagroinfiltration and infiltration--yes---[60]
DserNEP1 and DserNEP2/Diplodia seriataVitis viniferadip and infiltration--yes---[61]
PeNLP1 and PeNLP2/ Penicillium expansumN. benthamianaagroinfiltration--yes---[62]
CoNLP1/Colletotrichum orbiculareSeveral Cucurbitaceae cultivarsinfiltration **---yes--[63]
MoNLP1, MoNLP2 and MoNLP4/Magnaporthe oryzaeN. benthamianaagroinfiltration--yes---[64]
NLPPya/Pythium
aphanidermatum		N. benthamianainfiltration--yes---[65]
NLPPya/Pythium
aphanidermatum		A. thalianainfiltration--yes---[65]
NLPPya/Pythium
aphanidermatum		Phalaenopsis amabilisinfiltration--yes---[65]
NLPPp/Phytophthora parasiticaA. thalianainfiltration--yes---[65]
ElicitinINF1/Phytophthora infestansN. benthamianainfiltration-yes---[66]
β-CRY/Phytophthora cryptogeaThree Solanum spp. genotypessoakET, JA and
JA–Ile		-yes--[67]
INF1/Phytophthora infestansN. benthamianaagroinfiltration-yes---[68]
INF1/Phytophthora infestansN. benthamianaagroinfiltration-yes---[69]
INF1/Phytophthora infestansSolanum microdontumagroinfection-yes---[70]
Quercinin/Phytophthora quercinaN. benthamianacells soakETyes---[71]
Cryptogein/Phytophthora cryptogeaN. benthamianaplace onto the fresh wound-yesyes--[72]
Capsicein/Phytophthora capsiciN. benthamianaplace onto the fresh wound-yesyes--[72]
PoEli8/Pythium oligandrumN. benthamiana, tomato, and pepperinfiltration-yesyes--[73]
Note: Infiltration refers to infiltration by recombinant protein or cell extraction of recombinant E. coli and/or host pathogens. Phytohormones in the table refers to changes in phytohormone production. HR in the table refers to phenotype of plant. ** refers to infiltration of Colletotrichum orbiculare with NLP1 constitutive expression. - refers to not mentioned. -- refers to the changes in ethylene are not discussed in this table. Abbreviations: JA: jasmonic acid; IAA: indole-3-acetic acid; JA-Ile: jasmonic acid–isoleucine.

3. NLPs

Necrosis- and ethylene-inducing peptide 1 (Nep1)-like proteins (NLPs) constitute another group of proteinaceous elicitors widely secreted by bacteria, fungi, and oomycetes. NLPs contain characteristic NPP1 domains (PF05630) and are involved in multiple processes such as virulence, conidiospore production, formation of appressoria, abiotic stresses in microbes and triggering immune responses in plants [11,13,58,74,75]. On the basis of their impacts on host plants, NLPs are classified into two forms: cytotoxic to eudicot and monocot plants and noncytotoxic [59,65,76]. Cytotoxic NLPs are expressed when a pathogen converts from biotrophy into necrotrophy and function as pore-forming toxins (PFTs), and these NLPs bind to the terminal monomeric hexose moieties of glycosyl inositol phosphoryl ceramide (GIPC) to cause cytolysis [65,76,77,78]. Noncytotoxic NLPs induce an immune response without cytolysis. Since the first NLP protein, Nep1, was characterized in culture filtrates of Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. erythroxyli in 1995, many advances have been made to reveal the function and action mechanism of NLPs [79].

3.1. Taxonomy of NLPs

NLPs have been classified into types I, II, and III, on the basis of their amino acid sequences. Type I NLPs are the most abundant NLPs and can be found in bacteria, fungi, and especially oomycetes. Type II NLPs are found in bacteria, fungi and several oomycetes. Type I and type II NLPs have been characterized based on the number of cysteine residues they carry because cysteine is essential for their activity [76,80]. Type I NLPs usually carry 2 cysteine residues, which form one disulfide bridge, while type II NLPs generally harbor a second disulfide bridge, which is not required for necrosis induction [76]. Type II NLPs harbor a calcium-binding motif, which is essential for their cytotoxicity [81]. Type III NLPs, which exist exclusively in ascomycete fungi, are less conserved, with most NLPs harboring six cysteine residues [76,81]. Different species encode considerably different numbers of NLPs (including both cytotoxic and noncytotoxic types), ranging from only one or two in most bacteria to dozens in oomycetes, suggesting horizontal gene transfer in the evolution of NLPs [76].
Most NLPs are small proteins (which are approximately 25 kDa). They are single-domain (NPP1 domain, PF05630) proteins with signal peptides (SPs) on the N-terminus, and the NPP1 domain carries a conserved -HRH-W- fragment, which is important in the coordination of divalent cations and contributes to typical NLP features and physiological functions [76,82,83]. The protein is localized to the extracellular space through the classical secretion route and is further processed [76].

3.2. Involvement of NLPs in Immune Responses in Plants

As mentioned above, NLPs are involved in multiple processes in both microbes and plants. In this subsection, we focus on their effects on host plants (Table 2). Treatments with cytotoxic NLPs induce rapid cytolysis and result in plant cell necrosis [65,82]. In addition to NLPs functioning as PFTs, noncytotoxic NLPs and conserved fragments function as PAMPs/MAMPs to prime innate immunity in plants. Exogenous NLP or NLP fragment treatment or ectopic expression of NLP or conserved fragments (nlp20/nlp24) triggers plant immune responses, such as the expression of immune-responsive genes, activation of MAPK signaling cascades, bursts in ROS production, induction of SA, and enhanced plant immunity against pathogens in addition to necrosis and ethylene-induction [13,63,65,74,83,84,85].

3.3. Action Mechanisms of NLPs in Plant Immune Responses

The cytolytic mechanism triggered by cytotoxic NLPs has been described. As mentioned above, cytotoxic NLPs target and bind to the terminal hexose residues of glycosylinositol phosphorylceramide (GIPC) sphingolipids, which vary in total amount and concentration among different plants, which are located at the outer leaflet of the envelope membrane in plants [59,65]. The binding of GIPC-NLP is driven by electrostatic interactions, which can be strengthened in the presence of sterols and results in NLP conformational changes [65,77,86]. After binding, NLPs form functional oligomers and then form shallow transient pores that leak small molecules [77,87]. Tryptophan155 at the bottom of loop L3, an important amino acid involved in the NLP-GIPC interaction in model NLPPya, was identified by mutation and crystallization [65,82,86,88]. Moreover, differences between cytotoxic and noncytotoxic NLPs have been identified by mutation and crystallization analysis and have been attributed to hydrophobic amino acid residues in the Lc1, L2 and L3 loops of NLPs [86].
In addition to sphingolipids as NLP receptors, protein receptors of NLPs in plants have been identified. Specifically, in A. thaliana, a leucine-rich repeat (LRR) receptor named RLP23 has been reported. RLP23 associates with the LRR-receptor kinase (LRR-RK) SOBIR1 in the absence of NLPs. Upon ligand binding, another LRR-RK, BAK1, binds to form a tripartite complex and induces intracellular innate immune responses. In this complex, the LRR domain is essential to the function of RLP23 (Figure 1) [89]. Unlike its positive roles in immune responses triggered by flg22, the convergent and central immune hub BIK1 plays a negative role in the immune responses induced by NLPs in A. thaliana [90]. The immune responses induced by NLPs were milder and slower than those induced by flg22 [90]. Furthermore, an LRR-only protein, NTCD4, has been reported to be involved in NLP oligomerization, which is an important step in pore formation caused by NLPs in A. thaliana [91]. Although involvements, action mechanisms and differences between cytotoxic and noncytotoxic NLPs in plant immunity have been elucidated, there is a lack of practical applications in agriculture and gardening.

4. Elicitins

Elicitins are small elicitors secreted by oomycetes (particularly Phytophthora and Pythium) that trigger necrosis and immune responses in a variety of plants, especially in tobacco and certain Brassicaceae species, which are the main sources of vegetables [92,93]. Since the first elicitins, cryptogein and capsicein (both are approximately 10 kDa), were identified in Phytophthora cryptogea and Phytophthora capsici, respectively, dozens of elicitins, e.g., parasiticein and INF1, have been identified [72,92]. Similar to harpins, elicitin structures are highly conserved with no similarity to plant proteins, which makes them good elicitors [94].

4.1. Taxonomy of Elicitins

According to a phylogenetic analysis, elicitins were divided into four elicitin (ELI) and 13 elicitin-like (ELL) clades, in which ELI proteins shared a highly conserved 98-amino-acid domain (SMART 01187, PFAM 00964) with at least 66% sequence identity and contain six cysteine residues that form three disulfide bridges, while ELL proteins showed more diversity in terms of the length of the elicitin domain and cysteine spacing patterns; although similar to ELI proteins, they carry six cysteine residues [93,95]. ELI and ELL proteins carry of a signal peptide at the N-terminus, an elicitin domain and variable C-terminal domains, which tend to be enriched with threonine, serine, and proline residues, except for the ELI-1 clade proteins [93,94]. Even though elicitins share high sequence similarity, they differ in net charge, which is the basis for classifying them into acidic α-elicitins and basic β-elicitins; among these proteins, β-elicitins show 100-fold more necrosis-inducing effects than α-elicitins. The difference results from the difference in amino acid residues at position 13, with α-elicitins harboring a valine residue and β-elicitins harboring a lysine residue. The residue at position 13 not only determines the isoelectric point (pI) and induces necrosis but also participates in ligand/receptor binding [96,97,98,99]. The numbers of ELI and ELL genes vary among species, with each gene showing differential expression patterns and HR-inducing activities [100,101].

4.2. Involvement and Action Mechanisms of Elicitins in Plant Immune Responses

Elicitins triggered HR and immune responses, e.g., the burst of ROS, electrolyte leakage, activation of MAPK cascades, induction of PR genes and phytohormone in tobacco, tomato, potato, pigeon pea, citrus, grapevine, pepper, oak and some Brassicaceae cultivars but not in many other herbaceous and woody plants (Table 2) [73,92]. The responses to elicitins in different plants were highly variable.
Upon LRR-receptor-like protein (RLP) elicitin response (ELR) recognition of the conserved elicitin domain, where leucine41 in the ω-loop region plays an important role, the constitutive ELR–SOBIR1 complex associates with the immune coreceptor BAK1/SERK3 in an elicitin-inducible manner; this interaction triggers immune responses, e.g., membrane depolarization, ion flux, an early-phase ROS burst, activation of MAPK signaling cascades, induction of pathogenesis-related genes, and an increase in phytoalexin and phytohormone levels and the necrosis rate [66,67,69,70,99,102,103,104]. As the first PRR to be identified, ELR recognizes a broad range of elicitins via their conserved elicitin domain [70]. In addition to ELR, an LRR-RLP REli from N. benthamiana has been identified recently as the receptor of PoEli8 from Pythium oligandrum [73].
Distinctive biphasic ROS accumulation has been observed in plants in which the immune response has been triggered by elicitins [92,93,105]. Moreover, early-phase ROS production was induced quickly after elicitin treatment via the existing NADPH oxidases RBOHA and RBOHB, while second-phase or late-phase ROS production occurred hours later and was induced by the de novo expression of the rbohb gene, which was triggered by the activation of the MAPK-WRKY7/8/9/11 signaling cascade, causing HR [93,106,107,108,109]. The involvement of nitric oxide (NO), which is partially mediated by the S-nitrosation of RBOHD1 and phosphorylation of MAPK kinases, has been reported in elicitin-triggered immune activation in plants [96,106,110,111,112]. The subsequent activation of PR genes, induction of cell death and increased SA, JA and ET levels have been detected [67,96].
Similar to harpins and NLPs, treatment with elicitins contributes to pathogen resistance in plants (Table 2), which would be practically useful in agriculture and gardening. For instance, the infiltration of PoEli8 improves resistance against P. capsici in tomato and pepper, and soaking in β-CRY improves resistance against P. neolycopersici in tomato [67,73].

5. Other Elicitors

In addition to the above-mentioned classes of elicitors, many other proteinaceous elicitors have been studied, e.g., RNA replicases from Cucumber mosaic viru and coat protein from turnip crinkle virus, CBEL from Phytophthora parasitica var. nicotianae; PeaT1 and Hrip1 from Alternaria tenuissima; MoHrip1, MoHrip2 and MoGluB from Magnaporthe oryzae; and BcGS1 and PebC1 from Botrytis cinerea [113,114,115,116,117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124]. A 2a polymerase of Cucumber mosaic virus induced HR responses in cowpea, and the induction was independent of its replicase activity [122]. The coat protein of turnip crinkle virus elicited HR responses in Arabidopsis [123]. When administered at a 150 nM concentration, CBEL, a 34 kDa glycoprotein elicitor located in the P. parasitica cell wall, displayed cellulose-binding and elicitor-like defense activity in plants as well as lectin-like activity, eliciting necrosis and defense-related gene expression in tobacco [121]. Further work showed that two intact cellulose-binding domains were sufficient and indispensable for the induction of a defense mode in the dicot plants tobacco and A. thaliana [125]. Despite showing low sequence homology, MoHrip1 and MoHrip2 were necessary for the virulence of fungi and induced defense responses via the SA and GA pathways, increased drought tolerance via the ABA pathway and increased plant growth [12,115,117,126,127,128,129]. PebC1 has been shown to be involved in increased plant growth, tolerance to drought, and disease and insect pest resistance [119,130,131,132].

6. Prospects and Challenges

In this mini-review, we summarized the taxonomy, structures and features of proteinaceous elicitors, described their involvement in plant immunity and responses to abiotic stresses, and discussed their mechanisms of action. Advances in the study of elicitors from pathogens that trigger plant immunity are helpful not only to increase the knowledge of plant-microbe interactions but also for practical use in agriculture and gardening. Although efforts have been made to identify the involvement and mechanisms of proteinaceous elicitors in plant immunity, the mechanisms remain to be discovered. Moreover, a wider range of elicitors remains to be identified, especially elicitors that trigger intense and persistent immune and abiotic stress responses in plants. The interactions of different elicitors also remain largely uncharacterized, even though several have been assessed and reported on certain interactions. What is the molecular basis by which elicitors cause different responses in hosts and nonhosts? What are the evolutionary dynamics of elicitors? Do elicitors cause an immune response in a wider range of plants than has been discovered to date? How can proteinaceous elicitors be made more effective and durable for commercial applications? Ultimately, a better understanding of proteinaceous elicitors in the plant response to stresses will help to establish healthier and more environmentally friendly agricultural practices worldwide.

Author Contributions

Z.L. conceived and designed the manuscript, J.L. and W.M. collected references. Z.L., J.L. and W.M. wrote the manuscript. X.L. handled the Table 2. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This was funded by the Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province to Zhangqun Li (Grant No. LTQ20H300001) and the Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province to Xiaofang Li (Grant No. LQ20C010003).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this article.

Acknowledgments

The authors are very thankful to the committee of Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province (China) for funding acquisition.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Damalas, C.A.; Eleftherohorinos, I.G. Pesticide exposure, safety issues, and risk assessment indicators. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2011, 8, 1402–1419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Guo, J.; Cheng, Y. Advances in Fungal Elicitor-Triggered Plant Immunity. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 12003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Zhao, Y.; Zhu, X.; Chen, X.; Zhou, J.M. From plant immunity to crop disease resistance. J. Genet. Genomics 2022, 49, 693–703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Ngou, B.P.M.; Ding, P.; Jones, J.D.G. Thirty years of resistance: Zig-zag through the plant immune system. Plant Cell 2022, 34, 1447–1478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Wang, Y.; Pruitt, R.N.; Nurnberger, T.; Wang, Y. Evasion of plant immunity by microbial pathogens. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2022, 20, 449–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Zhou, J.M.; Zhang, Y. Plant Immunity: Danger Perception and Signaling. Cell 2020, 181, 978–989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Jones, J.D.; Dangl, J.L. The plant immune system. Nature 2006, 444, 323–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Yuan, M.; Jiang, Z.; Bi, G.; Nomura, K.; Liu, M.; Wang, Y.; Cai, B.; Zhou, J.M.; He, S.Y.; Xin, X.F. Pattern-recognition receptors are required for NLR-mediated plant immunity. Nature 2021, 592, 105–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Ngou, B.P.M.; Ahn, H.K.; Ding, P.; Jones, J.D.G. Mutual potentiation of plant immunity by cell-surface and intracellular receptors. Nature 2021, 592, 110–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Lu, C.; Jiang, Y.; Yue, Y.; Sui, Y.; Hao, M.; Kang, X.; Wang, Q.; Chen, D.; Liu, B.; Yin, Z.; et al. Glutathione and neodiosmin feedback sustain plant immunity. J. Exp. Bot. 2022, erac442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Liu, J.; Nie, J.; Chang, Y.; Huang, L. Nep1-like Proteins from Valsa mali Differentially Regulate Pathogen Virulence and Response to Abiotic Stresses. J. Fungi. 2021, 7, 830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Nie, H.; Zhang, L.; Zhuang, H.; Yang, X.; Qiu, D.; Zeng, H. Secreted protein MoHrip2 is required for full virulence of Magnaporthe oryzae and modulation of rice immunity. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2019, 103, 6153–6167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Lian, J.; Han, H.; Chen, X.; Chen, Q.; Zhao, J.; Li, C. Stemphylium lycopersici Nep1-like Protein (NLP) Is a Key Virulence Factor in Tomato Gray Leaf Spot Disease. J. Fungi. 2022, 8, 518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Sands, L.B.; Cheek, T.; Reynolds, J.; Ma, Y.; Berkowitz, G.A. Effects of Harpin and Flg22 on Growth Enhancement and Pathogen Defense in Cannabis sativa Seedlings. Plants 2022, 11, 1178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Zhou, X.; Chen, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Gao, F.; Liu, H. The application of exogenous PopW increases the tolerance of Solanum lycopersicum L. to drought stress through multiple mechanisms. Physiol. Mol. Biol. Plants 2020, 26, 2521–2535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Choi, M.S.; Kim, W.; Lee, C.; Oh, C.S. Harpins, multifunctional proteins secreted by gram-negative plant-pathogenic bacteria. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 2013, 26, 1115–1122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Wang, X.; Zhang, L.; Ji, H.; Mo, X.; Li, P.; Wang, J.; Dong, H. Hpa1 is a type III translocator in Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae. BMC Microbiol. 2018, 18, 105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Li, X.; Han, L.; Zhao, Y.; You, Z.; Dong, H.; Zhang, C. Hpa1 harpin needs nitroxyl terminus to promote vegetative growth and leaf photosynthesis in Arabidopsis. J. Biosci. 2014, 39, 127–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Liu, Y.; Zhou, X.; Liu, W.; Huang, J.; Liu, Q.; Sun, J.; Cai, X.; Miao, W. HpaXpm, a novel harpin of Xanthomonas phaseoli pv. manihotis, acts as an elicitor with high thermal stability, reduces disease, and promotes plant growth. BMC Microbiol. 2020, 20, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Wei, Z.M.; Laby, R.J.; Zumoff, C.H.; Bauer, D.W.; He, S.Y.; Collmer, A.; Beer, S.V. Harpin, elicitor of the hypersensitive response produced by the plant pathogen Erwinia amylovora. Science 1992, 257, 85–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Tarafdar, P.K.; Vedantam, L.V.; Podile, A.R.; Swamy, M.J. Thermally stable harpin, HrpZPss is sensitive to chemical denaturants: Probing tryptophan environment, chemical and thermal unfolding by fluorescence spectroscopy. Biochimie 2013, 95, 2437–2444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Liu, Y.; Zhou, X.; Liu, W.; Xiong, X.; Lv, C.; Zhou, X.; Miao, W. Functional regions of HpaXm as elicitors with specific heat tolerance induce the hypersensitive response or plant growth promotion in nonhost plants. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0188788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Charkowski, A.O.; Alfano, J.R.; Preston, G.; Yuan, J.; He, S.Y.; Collmer, A. The Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato HrpW protein has domains similar to harpins and pectate lyases and can elicit the plant hypersensitive response and bind to pectate. J. Bacteriol. 1998, 180, 5211–5217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  24. Kim, J.F.; Beer, S.V. HrpW of Erwinia amylovora, a new harpin that contains a domain homologous to pectate lyases of a distinct class. J. Bacteriol. 1998, 180, 5203–5210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  25. Li, J.G.; Liu, H.X.; Cao, J.; Chen, L.F.; Gu, C.; Allen, C.; Guo, J.H. PopW of Ralstonia solanacearum, a new two-domain harpin targeting the plant cell wall. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2010, 11, 371–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Li, L.; Wang, H.; Gago, J.; Cui, H.; Qian, Z.; Kodama, N.; Ji, H.; Tian, S.; Shen, D.; Chen, Y.; et al. Harpin Hpa1 Interacts with Aquaporin PIP1;4 to Promote the Substrate Transport and Photosynthesis in Arabidopsis. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 17207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Li, X.; Han, B.; Xu, M.; Han, L.; Zhao, Y.; Liu, Z.; Dong, H.; Zhang, C. Plant growth enhancement and associated physiological responses are coregulated by ethylene and gibberellin in response to harpin protein Hpa1. Planta 2014, 239, 831–846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Oh, C.S.; Beer, S.V. AtHIPM, an ortholog of the apple HrpN-interacting protein, is a negative regulator of plant growth and mediates the growth-enhancing effect of HrpN in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol. 2007, 145, 426–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Sun, T.; Wu, W.; Wu, H.; Rou, W.; Zhou, Y.; Zhuo, T.; Fan, X.; Hu, X.; Zou, H. Ralstonia solanacearum elicitor RipX Induces Defense Reaction by Suppressing the Mitochondrial atpA Gene in Host Plant. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 2000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Niu, L.; Yang, J.; Zhang, J.; He, H.; Xing, G.; Zhao, Q.; Guo, D.; Sui, L.; Zhong, X.; Yang, X. Introduction of the harpinXooc-encoding gene hrf2 in soybean enhances resistance against the oomycete pathogen Phytophthora sojae. Transgenic Res. 2019, 28, 257–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Ji, Z.L.; Yu, M.H.; Ding, Y.Y.; Li, J.; Zhu, F.; He, J.X.; Yang, L.N. Coiled-Coil N21 of Hpa1 in Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae Promotes Plant Growth, Disease Resistance and Drought Tolerance in Non-Hosts via Eliciting HR and Regulation of Multiple Defense Response Genes. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 22, 203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Peng, J.L.; Bao, Z.L.; Ren, H.Y.; Wang, J.S.; Dong, H.S. Expression of harpin(xoo) in transgenic tobacco induces pathogen defense in the absence of hypersensitive cell death. Phytopathology 2004, 94, 1048–1055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  33. Li, Y.R.; Ma, W.X.; Che, Y.Z.; Zou, L.F.; Zakria, M.; Zou, H.S.; Chen, G.Y. A highly-conserved single-stranded DNA-binding protein in Xanthomonas functions as a harpin-like protein to trigger plant immunity. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e56240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Wang, D.; Wang, B.; Wang, J.; Wang, S.; Wang, W.; Niu, Y. Exogenous Application of Harpin Protein Hpa1 onto Pinellia ternata Induces Systemic Resistance Against Tobacco Mosaic Virus. Phytopathology 2020, 110, 1189–1198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Lee, J.; Klessig, D.F.; Nurnberger, T. A harpin binding site in tobacco plasma membranes mediates activation of the pathogenesis-related gene HIN1 independent of extracellular calcium but dependent on mitogen-activated protein kinase activity. Plant Cell 2001, 13, 1079–1093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  36. Racape, J.; Belbahri, L.; Engelhardt, S.; Lacombe, B.; Lee, J.; Lochman, J.; Marais, A.; Nicole, M.; Nurnberger, T.; Parlange, F.; et al. Ca2+-dependent lipid binding and membrane integration of PopA, a harpin-like elicitor of the hypersensitive response in tobacco. Mol. Microbiol. 2005, 58, 1406–1420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Lee, J.; Klusener, B.; Tsiamis, G.; Stevens, C.; Neyt, C.; Tampakaki, A.P.; Panopoulos, N.J.; Noller, J.; Weiler, E.W.; Cornelis, G.R.; et al. HrpZ(Psph) from the plant pathogen Pseudomonas syringae pv. phaseolicola binds to lipid bilayers and forms an ion-conducting pore in vitro. Proc. Natl. Acad Sci. USA 2001, 98, 289–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Xie, Z.; Chen, Z. Harpin-induced hypersensitive cell death is associated with altered mitochondrial functions in tobacco cells. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 2000, 13, 183–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Krause, M.; Durner, J. Harpin inactivates mitochondria in Arabidopsis suspension cells. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 2004, 17, 131–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Samuel, M.A.; Hall, H.; Krzymowska, M.; Drzewiecka, K.; Hennig, J.; Ellis, B.E. SIPK signaling controls multiple components of harpin-induced cell death in tobacco. Plant J. 2005, 42, 406–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Desikan, R.; Clarke, A.; Atherfold, P.; Hancock, J.T.; Neill, S.J. Harpin induces mitogen-activated protein kinase activity during defence responses in Arabidopsis thaliana suspension cultures. Planta 1999, 210, 97–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Desikan, R.; Hancock, J.T.; Ichimura, K.; Shinozaki, K.; Neill, S.J. Harpin induces activation of the Arabidopsis mitogen-activated protein kinases AtMPK4 and AtMPK6. Plant Physiol. 2001, 126, 1579–1587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  43. Campa, M.; Piazza, S.; Righetti, L.; Oh, C.S.; Conterno, L.; Borejsza-Wysocka, E.; Nagamangala, K.C.; Beer, S.V.; Aldwinckle, H.S.; Malnoy, M. HIPM Is a Susceptibility Gene of Malus spp.: Reduced Expression Reduces Susceptibility to Erwinia amylovora. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 2019, 32, 167–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  44. Tian, S.; Wang, X.B.; Li, P.; Wang, H.; Ji, H.T.; Xie, J.Y.; Qiu, Q.L.; Shen, D.; Dong, H.S. Plant Aquaporin AtPIP1;4 Links Apoplastic H2O2 Induction to Disease Immunity Pathways. Plant Physiol. 2016, 171, 1635–1650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Fontanilla, J.M.; Montes, M.; De Prado, R. Induction of resistance to the pathogenic agent Botrytis cinerea in the cultivation of the tomato by means of the application of the protein “Harpin”(Messenger). Commun. Agric. Appl. Biol. Sci. 2005, 70, 35–40. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  46. Fontanilla, M.; Montes, M.; De Prado, R. Effects of the foliar-applied protein “Harpin(Ea)” (messenger) on tomatoes infected with Phytophthora infestans. Commun. Agric. Appl. Biol. Sci. 2005, 70, 41–45. [Google Scholar]
  47. Du, Q.; Yang, X.; Zhang, J.; Zhong, X.; Kim, K.S.; Yang, J.; Xing, G.; Li, X.; Jiang, Z.; Li, Q.; et al. Over-expression of the Pseudomonas syringae harpin-encoding gene hrpZm confers enhanced tolerance to Phytophthora root and stem rot in transgenic soybean. Transgenic Res. 2018, 27, 277–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Miao, W.; Wang, X.; Song, C.; Wang, Y.; Ren, Y.; Wang, J. Transcriptome analysis of Hpa1Xoo transformed cotton revealed constitutive expression of genes in multiple signalling pathways related to disease resistance. J. Exp. Bot. 2010, 61, 4263–4275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Cao, Y.; Yang, M.; Ma, W.; Sun, Y.; Chen, G. Overexpression of SSBXoc, a Single-Stranded DNA-Binding Protein From Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzicola, Enhances Plant Growth and Disease and Salt Stress Tolerance in Transgenic Nicotiana benthamiana. Front. Plant Sci. 2018, 9, 953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Chen, L.; Qian, J.; Qu, S.; Long, J.; Yin, Q.; Zhang, C.; Wu, X.; Sun, F.; Wu, T.; Hayes, M.; et al. Identification of specific fragments of HpaG Xooc, a harpin from Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzicola, that induce disease resistance and enhance growth in plants. Phytopathology 2008, 98, 781–791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Chen, L.; Zhang, S.J.; Zhang, S.S.; Qu, S.; Ren, X.; Long, J.; Yin, Q.; Qian, J.; Sun, F.; Zhang, C.; et al. A fragment of the Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzicola harpin HpaG Xooc reduces disease and increases yield of rice in extensive grower plantings. Phytopathology 2008, 98, 792–802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Demirkol, G. PopW enhances drought stress tolerance of alfalfa via activating antioxidative enzymes, endogenous hormones, drought related genes and inhibiting senescence genes. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2021, 166, 540–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Dong, H.P.; Peng, J.; Bao, Z.; Meng, X.; Bonasera, J.M.; Chen, G.; Beer, S.V.; Dong, H. Downstream divergence of the ethylene signaling pathway for harpin-stimulated Arabidopsis growth and insect defense. Plant Physiol. 2004, 136, 3628–3638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  54. Dong, Y.; Li, P.; Zhang, C. Harpin Hpa1 promotes flower development in Impatiens and Parochetus plants. Bot. Stud. 2016, 57, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  55. Kim, J.G.; Jeon, E.; Oh, J.; Moon, J.S.; Hwang, I. Mutational analysis of Xanthomonas harpin HpaG identifies a key functional region that elicits the hypersensitive response in nonhost plants. J. Bacteriol. 2004, 186, 6239–6247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Haapalainen, M.; Engelhardt, S.; Kufner, I.; Li, C.M.; Nurnberger, T.; Lee, J.; Romantschuk, M.; Taira, S. Functional mapping of harpin HrpZ of Pseudomonas syringae reveals the sites responsible for protein oligomerization, lipid interactions and plant defence induction. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2011, 12, 151–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Reboutier, D.; Bouteau, F. Harpins and ion channels modulations: Many ways to die. Plant Signal. Behav. 2008, 3, 314–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Yang, G.; Yang, J.; Zhang, Q.; Wang, W.; Feng, L.; Zhao, L.; An, B.; Wang, Q.; He, C.; Luo, H. The Effector Protein CgNLP1 of Colletotrichum gloeosporioides Affects Invasion and Disrupts Nuclear Localization of Necrosis-Induced Transcription Factor HbMYB8-Like to Suppress Plant Defense Signaling. Front. Microbiol. 2022, 13, 911479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Steentjes, M.B.F.; Herrera Valderrama, A.L.; Fouillen, L.; Bahammou, D.; Leisen, T.; Albert, I.; Nurnberger, T.; Hahn, M.; Mongrand, S.; Scholten, O.E.; et al. Cytotoxic activity of Nep1-like proteins on monocots. New Phytol. 2022, 235, 690–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Schumacher, S.; Grosser, K.; Voegele, R.T.; Kassemeyer, H.H.; Fuchs, R. Identification and Characterization of Nep1-Like Proteins From the Grapevine Downy Mildew Pathogen Plasmopara viticola. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Cobos, R.; Calvo-Pena, C.; Alvarez-Perez, J.M.; Ibanez, A.; Diez-Galan, A.; Gonzalez-Garcia, S.; Garcia-Angulo, P.; Acebes, J.L.; Coque, J.J.R. Necrotic and Cytolytic Activity on Grapevine Leaves Produced by Nep1-Like Proteins of Diplodia seriata. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 1282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Levin, E.; Raphael, G.; Ma, J.; Ballester, A.R.; Feygenberg, O.; Norelli, J.; Aly, R.; Gonzalez-Candelas, L.; Wisniewski, M.; Droby, S. Identification and Functional Analysis of NLP-Encoding Genes from the Postharvest Pathogen Penicillium expansum. Microorganisms 2019, 7, 175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  63. Azmi, N.S.A.; Singkaravanit-Ogawa, S.; Ikeda, K.; Kitakura, S.; Inoue, Y.; Narusaka, Y.; Shirasu, K.; Kaido, M.; Mise, K.; Takano, Y. Inappropriate Expression of an NLP Effector in Colletotrichum orbiculare Impairs Infection on Cucurbitaceae cultivars via Plant Recognition of the C-Terminal Region. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 2018, 31, 101–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  64. Fang, Y.L.; Peng, Y.L.; Fan, J. The Nep1-like protein family of Magnaporthe oryzae is dispensable for the infection of rice plants. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 4372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  65. Lenarcic, T.; Albert, I.; Bohm, H.; Hodnik, V.; Pirc, K.; Zavec, A.B.; Podobnik, M.; Pahovnik, D.; Zagar, E.; Pruitt, R.; et al. Eudicot plant-specific sphingolipids determine host selectivity of microbial NLP cytolysins. Science 2017, 358, 1431–1434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. Imano, S.; Fushimi, M.; Camagna, M.; Tsuyama-Koike, A.; Mori, H.; Ashida, A.; Tanaka, A.; Sato, I.; Chiba, S.; Kawakita, K.; et al. AP2/ERF Transcription Factor NbERF-IX-33 Is Involved in the Regulation of Phytoalexin Production for the Resistance of Nicotiana benthamiana to Phytophthora infestans. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 821574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Stary, T.; Satkova, P.; Piterkova, J.; Mieslerova, B.; Luhova, L.; Mikulik, J.; Kasparovsky, T.; Petrivalsky, M.; Lochman, J. The elicitin β-cryptogein’s activity in tomato is mediated by jasmonic acid and ethylene signalling pathways independently of elicitin-sterol interactions. Planta 2019, 249, 739–749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Turnbull, D.; Wang, H.; Breen, S.; Malec, M.; Naqvi, S.; Yang, L.; Welsh, L.; Hemsley, P.; Zhendong, T.; Brunner, F.; et al. AVR2 Targets BSL Family Members, Which Act as Susceptibility Factors to Suppress Host Immunity. Plant Physiol. 2019, 180, 571–581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. Domazakis, E.; Wouters, D.; Visser, R.G.F.; Kamoun, S.; Joosten, M.; Vleeshouwers, V. The ELR-SOBIR1 Complex Functions as a Two-Component Receptor-Like Kinase to Mount Defense Against Phytophthora infestans. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 2018, 31, 795–802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  70. Du, J.; Verzaux, E.; Chaparro-Garcia, A.; Bijsterbosch, G.; Keizer, L.C.; Zhou, J.; Liebrand, T.W.; Xie, C.; Govers, F.; Robatzek, S.; et al. Elicitin recognition confers enhanced resistance to Phytophthora infestans in potato. Nat. Plants 2015, 1, 15034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Koehl, J.; Djulic, A.; Kirner, V.; Nguyen, T.T.; Heiser, I. Ethylene is required for elicitin-induced oxidative burst but not for cell death induction in tobacco cell suspension cultures. J. Plant Physiol. 2007, 164, 1555–1563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Ricci, P.; Bonnet, P.; Huet, J.C.; Sallantin, M.; Beauvais-Cante, F.; Bruneteau, M.; Billard, V.; Michel, G.; Pernollet, J.C. Structure and activity of proteins from pathogenic fungi Phytophthora eliciting necrosis and acquired resistance in tobacco. Eur. J. Biochem. 1989, 183, 555–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Yang, K.; Wang, Y.; Zhao, H.; Shen, D.; Dou, D.; Jing, M. Novel EIicitin from Pythium oligandrum Confers Disease Resistance against Phytophthora capsici in Solanaceae Plants. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2022, 70, 16135–16145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Yang, C.; Li, W.; Huang, X.; Tang, X.; Qin, L.; Liu, Y.; Xia, Y.; Peng, Z.; Xia, S. SsNEP2 Contributes to the Virulence of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum. Pathogens 2022, 11, 446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Magwanga, R.O.; Kirungu, J.N.; Lu, P.; Cai, X.; Zhou, Z.; Xu, Y.; Hou, Y.; Agong, S.G.; Wang, K.; Liu, F. Map-Based Functional Analysis of the GhNLP Genes Reveals Their Roles in Enhancing Tolerance to N-Deficiency in Cotton. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 4953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  76. Seidl, M.F.; Van den Ackerveken, G. Activity and Phylogenetics of the Broadly Occurring Family of Microbial Nep1-Like Proteins. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 2019, 57, 367–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Pirc, K.; Clifton, L.A.; Yilmaz, N.; Saltalamacchia, A.; Mally, M.; Snoj, T.; Znidarsic, N.; Srnko, M.; Borisek, J.; Parkkila, P.; et al. An oomycete NLP cytolysin forms transient small pores in lipid membranes. Sci. Adv. 2022, 8, eabj9406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Irieda, H.; Maeda, H.; Akiyama, K.; Hagiwara, A.; Saitoh, H.; Uemura, A.; Terauchi, R.; Takano, Y. Colletotrichum orbiculare Secretes Virulence Effectors to a Biotrophic Interface at the Primary Hyphal Neck via Exocytosis Coupled with SEC22-Mediated Traffic. Plant Cell 2014, 26, 2265–2281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  79. Bailey, B.A. Purification of a protein from culture filtrates of Fusarium oxysporum that induces ethylene and necrosis in leaves of Erythroxylum coca. Phytopathology 1995, 6, 1250–1255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Fellbrich, G.; Romanski, A.; Varet, A.; Blume, B.; Brunner, F.; Engelhardt, S.; Felix, G.; Kemmerling, B.; Krzymowska, M.; Nurnberger, T. NPP1, a Phytophthora-associated trigger of plant defense in parsley and Arabidopsis. Plant J. 2002, 32, 375–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Oome, S.; Van den Ackerveken, G. Comparative and functional analysis of the widely occurring family of Nep1-like proteins. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 2014, 27, 1081–1094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Ottmann, C.; Luberacki, B.; Kufner, I.; Koch, W.; Brunner, F.; Weyand, M.; Mattinen, L.; Pirhonen, M.; Anderluh, G.; Seitz, H.U.; et al. A common toxin fold mediates microbial attack and plant defense. Proc. Natl. Acad Sci. USA 2009, 106, 10359–10364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  83. Yang, K.; Chen, C.; Wang, Y.; Li, J.; Dong, X.; Cheng, Y.; Zhang, H.; Zhai, Y.; Ai, G.; Song, Q.; et al. Nep1-Like Proteins From the Biocontrol Agent Pythium oligandrum Enhance Plant Disease Resistance Independent of Cell Death and Reactive Oxygen Species. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 830636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Dallal Bashi, Z.; Hegedus, D.D.; Buchwaldt, L.; Rimmer, S.R.; Borhan, M.H. Expression and regulation of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum necrosis and ethylene-inducing peptides (NEPs). Mol. Plant Pathol. 2010, 11, 43–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Tian, H.; Wu, Z.; Chen, S.; Ao, K.; Huang, W.; Yaghmaiean, H.; Sun, T.; Xu, F.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, S.; et al. Activation of TIR signalling boosts pattern-triggered immunity. Nature 2021, 598, 500–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Lenarcic, T.; Pirc, K.; Hodnik, V.; Albert, I.; Borisek, J.; Magistrato, A.; Nurnberger, T.; Podobnik, M.; Anderluh, G. Molecular basis for functional diversity among microbial Nep1-like proteins. PLoS Pathog. 2019, 15, e1007951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  87. Pirc, K.; Albert, I.; Nurnberger, T.; Anderluh, G. Disruption of plant plasma membrane by Nep1-like proteins in pathogen-plant interactions. New Phytol. 2022, 237, 746–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Zaparoli, G.; Barsottini, M.R.; de Oliveira, J.F.; Dyszy, F.; Teixeira, P.J.; Barau, J.G.; Garcia, O.; Costa-Filho, A.J.; Ambrosio, A.L.; Pereira, G.A.; et al. The crystal structure of necrosis- and ethylene-inducing protein 2 from the causal agent of cacao’s Witches’ Broom disease reveals key elements for its activity. Biochemistry 2011, 50, 9901–9910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Albert, I.; Bohm, H.; Albert, M.; Feiler, C.E.; Imkampe, J.; Wallmeroth, N.; Brancato, C.; Raaymakers, T.M.; Oome, S.; Zhang, H.; et al. An RLP23-SOBIR1-BAK1 complex mediates NLP-triggered immunity. Nat. Plants 2015, 1, 15140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Wan, W.L.; Zhang, L.; Pruitt, R.; Zaidem, M.; Brugman, R.; Ma, X.; Krol, E.; Perraki, A.; Kilian, J.; Grossmann, G.; et al. Comparing Arabidopsis receptor kinase and receptor protein-mediated immune signaling reveals BIK1-dependent differences. New Phytol. 2019, 221, 2080–2095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Chen, J.B.; Bao, S.W.; Fang, Y.L.; Wei, L.Y.; Zhu, W.S.; Peng, Y.L.; Fan, J. An LRR-only protein promotes NLP-triggered cell death and disease susceptibility by facilitating oligomerization of NLP in Arabidopsis. New Phytol. 2021, 232, 1808–1822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Derevnina, L.; Dagdas, Y.F.; De la Concepcion, J.C.; Bialas, A.; Kellner, R.; Petre, B.; Domazakis, E.; Du, J.; Wu, C.H.; Lin, X.; et al. Nine things to know about elicitins. New Phytol. 2016, 212, 888–895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  93. Janku, M.; Cincalova, L.; Luhova, L.; Lochman, J.; Petrivalsky, M. Biological effects of oomycetes elicitins. Plant Prot. Sci. 2020, 56, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  94. Jiang, R.H.; Tyler, B.M.; Whisson, S.C.; Hardham, A.R.; Govers, F. Ancient origin of elicitin gene clusters in Phytophthora genomes. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2006, 23, 338–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  95. Boissy, G.; de La Fortelle, E.; Kahn, R.; Huet, J.C.; Bricogne, G.; Pernollet, J.C.; Brunie, S. Crystal structure of a fungal elicitor secreted by Phytophthora cryptogea, a member of a novel class of plant necrotic proteins. Structure 1996, 4, 1429–1439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  96. Janku, M.; Jedelska, T.; Cincalova, L.; Sedlar, A.; Mikulik, J.; Luhova, L.; Lochman, J.; Petrivalsky, M. Structure-activity relationships of oomycete elicitins uncover the role of reactive oxygen and nitrogen species in triggering plant defense responses. Plant Sci. 2022, 319, 111239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. O’Donohue, M.J.; Gousseau, H.; Huet, J.C.; Tepfer, D.; Pernollet, J.C. Chemical synthesis, expression and mutagenesis of a gene encoding β-cryptogein, an elicitin produced by Phytophthora cryptogea. Plant Mol. Biol. 1995, 27, 577–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Pleskova, V.; Kasparovsky, T.; Oboril, M.; Ptackova, N.; Chaloupkova, R.; Ladislav, D.; Damborsky, J.; Lochman, J. Elicitin-membrane interaction is driven by a positive charge on the protein surface: Role of Lys13 residue in lipids loading and resistance induction. Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2011, 49, 321–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Dokladal, L.; Oboril, M.; Stejskal, K.; Zdrahal, Z.; Ptackova, N.; Chaloupkova, R.; Damborsky, J.; Kasparovsky, T.; Jeandroz, S.; Zd’arska, M.; et al. Physiological and proteomic approaches to evaluate the role of sterol binding in elicitin-induced resistance. J. Exp. Bot. 2012, 63, 2203–2215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  100. Ponchet, M.; Panabieres, F.; Milat, M.L.; Mikes, V.; Montillet, J.L.; Suty, L.; Triantaphylides, C.; Tirilly, Y.; Blein, J.P. Are elicitins cryptograms in plant-Oomycete communications? Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 1999, 56, 1020–1047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Qutob, D.; Huitema, E.; Gijzen, M.; Kamoun, S. Variation in structure and activity among elicitins from Phytophthora sojae. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2003, 4, 119–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  102. Lecourieux-Ouaked, F.; Pugin, A.; Lebrun-Garcia, A. Phosphoproteins involved in the signal transduction of cryptogein, an elicitor of defense reactions in tobacco. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 2000, 13, 821–829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  103. Wendehenne, D.; Lamotte, O.; Frachisse, J.M.; Barbier-Brygoo, H.; Pugin, A. Nitrate efflux is an essential component of the cryptogein signaling pathway leading to defense responses and hypersensitive cell death in tobacco. Plant Cell 2002, 14, 1937–1951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  104. Liu, Z.Q.; Qiu, A.L.; Shi, L.P.; Cai, J.S.; Huang, X.Y.; Yang, S.; Wang, B.; Shen, L.; Huang, M.K.; Mou, S.L.; et al. SRC2-1 is required in PcINF1-induced pepper immunity by acting as an interacting partner of PcINF1. J. Exp. Bot. 2015, 66, 3683–3698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  105. Chaparro-Garcia, A.; Wilkinson, R.C.; Gimenez-Ibanez, S.; Findlay, K.; Coffey, M.D.; Zipfel, C.; Rathjen, J.P.; Kamoun, S.; Schornack, S. The receptor-like kinase SERK3/BAK1 is required for basal resistance against the late blight pathogen Phytophthora infestans in Nicotiana benthamiana. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e16608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Asai, S.; Ohta, K.; Yoshioka, H. MAPK signaling regulates nitric oxide and NADPH oxidase-dependent oxidative bursts in Nicotiana benthamiana. Plant Cell 2008, 20, 1390–1406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  107. Ishihama, N.; Yamada, R.; Yoshioka, M.; Katou, S.; Yoshioka, H. Phosphorylation of the Nicotiana benthamiana WRKY8 transcription factor by MAPK functions in the defense response. Plant Cell 2011, 23, 1153–1170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  108. Adachi, H.; Nakano, T.; Miyagawa, N.; Ishihama, N.; Yoshioka, M.; Katou, Y.; Yaeno, T.; Shirasu, K.; Yoshioka, H. WRKY Transcription Factors Phosphorylated by MAPK Regulate a Plant Immune NADPH Oxidase in Nicotiana benthamiana. Plant Cell 2015, 27, 2645–2663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  109. Noirot, E.; Der, C.; Lherminier, J.; Robert, F.; Moricova, P.; Kieu, K.; Leborgne-Castel, N.; Simon-Plas, F.; Bouhidel, K. Dynamic changes in the subcellular distribution of the tobacco ROS-producing enzyme RBOHD in response to the oomycete elicitor cryptogein. J. Exp. Bot. 2014, 65, 5011–5022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  110. Saito, S.; Yamamoto-Katou, A.; Yoshioka, H.; Doke, N.; Kawakita, K. Peroxynitrite generation and tyrosine nitration in defense responses in tobacco BY-2 cells. Plant Cell Physiol. 2006, 47, 689–697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Yamamoto-Katou, A.; Katou, S.; Yoshioka, H.; Doke, N.; Kawakita, K. Nitrate reductase is responsible for elicitin-induced nitric oxide production in Nicotiana benthamiana. Plant Cell Physiol. 2006, 47, 726–735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Kulik, A.; Noirot, E.; Grandperret, V.; Bourque, S.; Fromentin, J.; Salloignon, P.; Truntzer, C.; Dobrowolska, G.; Simon-Plas, F.; Wendehenne, D. Interplays between nitric oxide and reactive oxygen species in cryptogein signalling. Plant Cell Environ. 2015, 38, 331–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Zhang, W.; Yang, X.; Qiu, D.; Guo, L.; Zeng, H.; Mao, J.; Gao, Q. PeaT1-induced systemic acquired resistance in tobacco follows salicylic acid-dependent pathway. Mol. Biol. Rep. 2011, 38, 2549–2556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Kulye, M.; Liu, H.; Zhang, Y.; Zeng, H.; Yang, X.; Qiu, D. Hrip1, a novel protein elicitor from necrotrophic fungus, Alternaria tenuissima, elicits cell death, expression of defence-related genes and systemic acquired resistance in tobacco. Plant Cell Environ. 2012, 35, 2104–2120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  115. Chen, M.; Zeng, H.; Qiu, D.; Guo, L.; Yang, X.; Shi, H.; Zhou, T.; Zhao, J. Purification and characterization of a novel hypersensitive response-inducing elicitor from Magnaporthe oryzae that triggers defense response in rice. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e37654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  116. Liu, M.; Liu, X.; Zeng, H.; Qiu, D. Purification, crystallization and preliminary X-ray diffraction analysis of effector protein MoHrip2 from Magnaporthe oryzae. Acta Crystallogr. Sect. F Struct. Biol. Cryst. Commun. 2013, 69, 463–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  117. Chen, M.; Zhang, C.; Zi, Q.; Qiu, D.; Liu, W.; Zeng, H. A novel elicitor identified from Magnaporthe oryzae triggers defense responses in tobacco and rice. Plant Cell Rep. 2014, 33, 1865–1879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Zhang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Qiu, D.; Zeng, H.; Guo, L.; Yang, X. BcGs1, a glycoprotein from Botrytis cinerea, elicits defence response and improves disease resistance in host plants. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2015, 457, 627–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Zhang, Y.; Yang, X.; Liu, Q.; Qiu, D.; Zhang, Y.; Zeng, H.; Yuan, J.; Mao, J. Purification of novel protein elicitor from Botrytis cinerea that induces disease resistance and drought tolerance in plants. Microbiol. Res. 2010, 165, 142–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Wang, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Wang, X.; Zhong, L.; Fan, Q.; Lan, Z.; Ye, X.; Huang, Y.; Li, Z.; Cui, Z. Functional Characterization of the Novel Laminaripentaose-Producing beta-1,3-Glucanase MoGluB and Its Biocontrol of Magnaporthe oryzae. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2021, 69, 9571–9584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Mateos, F.V.; Rickauer, M.; Esquerre-Tugaye, M.T. Cloning and characterization of a cDNA encoding an elicitor of Phytophthora parasitica var. nicotianae that shows cellulose-binding and lectin-like activities. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 1997, 10, 1045–1053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  122. Hu, Z.; Zhang, T.; Yao, M.; Feng, Z.; Miriam, K.; Wu, J.; Zhou, X.; Tao, X. The 2a protein of Cucumber mosaic virus induces a hypersensitive response in cowpea independently of its replicase activity. Virus Res. 2012, 170, 169–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  123. Kachroo, P.; Yoshioka, K.; Shah, J.; Dooner, H.K.; Klessig, D.F. Resistance to turnip crinkle virus in Arabidopsis is regulated by two host genes and is salicylic acid dependent but NPR1, ethylene, and jasmonate independent. Plant Cell 2000, 12, 677–690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  124. Garcia, J.A.; Pallas, V. Viral factors involved in plant pathogenesis. Curr. Opin. Virol. 2015, 11, 21–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Gaulin, E.; Drame, N.; Lafitte, C.; Torto-Alalibo, T.; Martinez, Y.; Ameline-Torregrosa, C.; Khatib, M.; Mazarguil, H.; Villalba-Mateos, F.; Kamoun, S.; et al. Cellulose binding domains of a Phytophthora cell wall protein are novel pathogen-associated molecular patterns. Plant Cell 2006, 18, 1766–1777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  126. Khan, N.U.; Liu, M.; Yang, X.; Qiu, D. Fungal Elicitor MoHrip2 Induces Disease Resistance in Rice Leaves, Triggering Stress-Related Pathways. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0158112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  127. Wang, Z.; Han, Q.; Zi, Q.; Lv, S.; Qiu, D.; Zeng, H. Enhanced disease resistance and drought tolerance in transgenic rice plants overexpressing protein elicitors from Magnaporthe oryzae. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0175734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  128. Lv, S.; Wang, Z.; Yang, X.; Guo, L.; Qiu, D.; Zeng, H. Transcriptional Profiling of Rice Treated with MoHrip1 Reveal the Function of Protein Elicitor in Enhancement of Disease Resistance and Plant Growth. Front Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 1818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  129. Nie, H.Z.; Zhang, L.; Zhuang, H.Q.; Shi, W.J.; Yang, X.F.; Qiu, D.W.; Zeng, H.M. The Secreted Protein MoHrip1 Is Necessary for the Virulence of Magnaporthe oryzae. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 1643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  130. Basit, A.; Hanan, A.; Nazir, T.; Majeed, M.Z.; Qiu, D. Molecular and Functional Characterization of Elicitor PeBC1 Extracted from Botrytis cinerea Involved in the Induction of Resistance against Green Peach Aphid (Myzus persicae) in Common Beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Insects 2019, 10, 35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  131. Javed, K.; Humayun, T.; Humayun, A.; Wang, Y.; Javed, H. PeaT1 and PeBC1 Microbial Protein Elicitors Enhanced Resistance against Myzus persicae Sulzer in Chili Capsicum annum L. Microorganisms 2021, 9, 2197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  132. Zhang, Y.; Yang, X.; Zeng, H.; Guo, L.; Yuan, J.; Qiu, D. Fungal elicitor protein PebC1 from Botrytis cinerea improves disease resistance in Arabidopsis thaliana. Biotechnol. Lett. 2014, 36, 1069–1078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Life 13 00268 g001 550
Figure 1. The BAK1–RLP23–SOBIR1 complex recognizes NLP peptides and mediates immune responses. RLP23 and SOBIR1 complex together and are isolated from BAK1 without NLP peptide perception. NLP peptides from pathogens are perceived by RLP23 and form tripartite receptor complexes of BAK1–RLP23–SOBIR1, which initiate downstream immune responses, including ROS burst, MAPK cascade activation, PR gene transcription and ethylene production. NTCD4, an LRR-only protein, promotes NLP oligomerization that induces pore formation on the plasma membrane, which is cytotoxic and triggers cell death.
Figure 1. The BAK1–RLP23–SOBIR1 complex recognizes NLP peptides and mediates immune responses. RLP23 and SOBIR1 complex together and are isolated from BAK1 without NLP peptide perception. NLP peptides from pathogens are perceived by RLP23 and form tripartite receptor complexes of BAK1–RLP23–SOBIR1, which initiate downstream immune responses, including ROS burst, MAPK cascade activation, PR gene transcription and ethylene production. NTCD4, an LRR-only protein, promotes NLP oligomerization that induces pore formation on the plasma membrane, which is cytotoxic and triggers cell death.
Life 13 00268 g001
Table
Table 1. Several carbohydrates and proteinaceous elicitors.
Table 1. Several carbohydrates and proteinaceous elicitors.
CarbohydratesProteins/Peptides
Endogenous elicitorsxylan, oligo-galacturonic acid, …glucanase, glutathione, …
Exogenous elicitorspeptidoglycan, chitin, glucan, lipopolysaccharides, …flagellin (flg22), elongation factor Tu (EF-Tu), harpins, elicitins, NLPs, virus coat proteins, virus RNA replicases, …
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Li, Z.; Liu, J.; Ma, W.; Li, X. Characteristics, Roles and Applications of Proteinaceous Elicitors from Pathogens in Plant Immunity. Life 2023, 13, 268. https://doi.org/10.3390/life13020268

AMA Style

Li Z, Liu J, Ma W, Li X. Characteristics, Roles and Applications of Proteinaceous Elicitors from Pathogens in Plant Immunity. Life. 2023; 13(2):268. https://doi.org/10.3390/life13020268

Chicago/Turabian Style

Li, Zhangqun, Junnan Liu, Wenting Ma, and Xiaofang Li. 2023. "Characteristics, Roles and Applications of Proteinaceous Elicitors from Pathogens in Plant Immunity" Life 13, no. 2: 268. https://doi.org/10.3390/life13020268

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop