CEPCEB Members
Linda L. Walling Professor
of Genetics Associate Dean of Biological Sciences, College of Natural and Agricultural
Sciences Department of Botany and Plant Sciences 3207 Batchelor Hall
University of California Riverside, CA 92521 Phone: (951) 827-4687
FAX: (951) 827-4437 
| Areas
of Expertise | - Plant/pest Interactions
- Defense
Mechanisms
- Aminopeptidases and Transferases That Modify the N-terminus
of Proteins
|
|  |
| Background I
was trained as an Escherichia coli bacteriophage geneticist and received by Ph.D.
from the Department of Microbiology at the University of Rochester Medical School
in Rochester, New York in 1980. My first postdoctoral fellowship was performed
under the guidance of Dr. James Darnell (Rockefeller University) where I studied
mechanisms of gene expression in mouse liver. My entry into the plant world was
initiated with my second postdoctoral fellowship with Dr. Robert Goldberg (UCLA).
Under his mentorship, I investigated transcriptional and post-transcriptional
control of seed protein gene expression in soybeans. In 1984, I joined the
Department of Botany and Plant Sciences at UC Riverside as an Assistant Professor
of Genetics and progressed through the ranks to Full Professor. Initially, my
laboratory studied the interactions of developmental and light regulatory signals
in the regulation of the chlorophyll a/b binding protein genes of soybean. In
1990, my laboratory's emphasis shifted dramatically to focus on understanding
plant responses to wounding, pathogens, and herbivores. Two research projects
dominate our current research initiatives. First, we are dissecting the mechanisms
used to perceive phloem-feeding whiteflies in squash, tomato and Arabidopsis.
Second, we identified a peptidase (leucine aminopeptidase) that responds to bacterial
pathogens, wounding and tissue-damaging herbivores. This enzyme has led us into
studies to understand the role of N-terminal processing enzymes during development
and in response to stress. We utilize multidisciplinary approaches in both projects
by incorporating the tools of biochemistry, genetics, cell biology, and genomics.
Back to Top  Role
of Aminopeptidases in Defense and Development Co- and posttranslational
modifications of eukaryotic proteins, which may number as many as two hundred
separate types of reactions, can occur throughout the polypeptide chain and are
essential for a variety of functions, such as translocation, activation, regulation,
and, ultimately, degradation. Indeed, these modifications are sufficiently extensive
that it can be predicted that essentially all proteins are modified at least once
during their lifetime. The N-terminal region is a particularly active area for
such alterations and the earliest known modifications are those that occur at
or near the N-terminus. In eukaryotes, three types of reactions predominate: 1)
limited proteolysis to remove one or more amino acids; 2) modification of the
a-amino group; and 3) side chain-specific changes. My laboratory is particularly
interested in the limited proteolysis that is executed by aminopeptidases.
The wide variety of aminopeptidases that are found in eukaryotes act primarily
on mature proteins (or peptides derived there from) (Walling and Gu, 1996). Their
roles are varied and ill defined and virtually unstudied in plants. Many aminopeptidases
are certainly involved in protein turnover acting post-proteasomally to complete
the conversion of the peptides released by the 26S proteasome to free amino acids.
Other aminopeptidases are likely involved in activation/deactivation processes,
particularly of bioactive peptides. Given the rising number of bioactive peptides
in plants that control plant developmental and stress responses, the role of aminopeptidases
in biogenesis or catabolism of critical regulatory molecules is likely. Finally,
aminopeptidases may have important roles in dictating half-lives of proteins within
cellular compartments. We were drawn into this field by the identification
of a tomato leucine aminopeptidase gene that is induced by Pseudomonas syringae
pv. tomato (Pautot et al., 1993). Our studies have shown that in tomato there
are two classes of LAP proteins (Gu et al., 1996). The constitutive LapN expressed
ubiquitously being detected in all plants examined to date. LAP-N is present in
all organs and is not response to hormone treatments or stress signals. In contrast,
LapA RNAs, proteins and activities are limited to a subset of the Solanaceae (Chao
et al., 2000) and are expressed in fruit and flowers (Fig. 1).
 |  |  |
| Figure 1. Panel A: GUS activity in flowers of
transgenic tomatoes expressing the LapA:GUS gene. Panel B: GUS activity in LapA:GUS
plants after JA treatments. GUS activity in untreated LapA:GUS, 35S:GUS plants
and non-transformed control plants. Panel C:Accumulation of the 55-kD LAP-A (Blue
arrow), 55-kD LAP-N and LAP-like proteins (66-kD and 77-kD) in response to wound
and abiotic stress signals. | LapA genes are
expressed in foliage only after being challenged with biotic or abiotic stress
stimuli including, P.s. tomato, chewing insects (Manduca sexta or Spodoptera littoralis),
mechanical wounding, and water-deficit and salinity stress, but not heat shock
(Chao et al., 1999; Gu et al., 1999). Treatments with defense signals indicate
that LapA genes are regulated by the wound-induced octadecanoid pathway (Chao
et al., 1999). Analysis of transgenic tomato plants expressing an antisense LapA
construct indicates that LAP-A may have a role in modulating some aspect of the
wound response. 35S:asLapA plants have an impaired wound response because proteinase
inhibitor 2 RNA levels are diminished relative to control plants after wounding.
Surprisingly, there was no substantial impairment of the growth of P.s. tomato
or M. sexta (Pautot et al., 2001) on these plants. However, the presence of trace
amounts of this enzyme in the 35S:asLapA plants makes these data difficult to
interpret. Analysis of LapA:asLapA and silenced plants, which more tightly down-regulate
LapA expression, are being analyzed currently. Transgenic tomatoes that ectopically
express LAP-A are also being investigated. These reverse genetic approaches are
likely to elucidate the roles of LAP in both abiotic and biotic stress. The role
of LAP-A and LAP-N in the N-end rule pathway for protein turnover is being tested
using novel transgenic tomato plants expressing chimeric reporter genes. To
date, LAP-A is the best biochemically characterized aminopeptidase in plants.
This homohexameric enzyme has a high temperature and pH optima (Gu et al., 1999).
Based on the analysis of over 30 chromogenic substrates and 68 peptide substrates
LAP-A preferentially cleaves substrates with N-terminal (P1) Leu, Met, Arg and
Ala (Gu et al., 1999; Gu and Walling, 2000). It will not cleave substrates with
acidic residues in the P1 or P1' position. We have recently shown by site directed
mutagenesis that the plant LAP-A is likely to utilize a reaction mechanism similar
to that used by the bovine LAP and E. coli PepA (Gu and Walling, 2001). A crystal
structure for the tomato LAP-A is being determined. Despite the fact that
over 50 aminopeptidases have been biochemically purified from plants (Walling
and Gu, 1996), the Lap genes of tomato are the only well characterized aminopeptidases
in plants. Given the availability of the complete Arabidopsis genome, we are now
able to assess the minimal complement of aminopeptidases present in plants. To
data we have identified 12 different classes of aminopeptidases. There is a curious
paucity of membrane-associated aminopeptidases relative to animals and yeast.
Aminopeptidases with putative locations in the cytosol, mitochondrion, and plastid
have been identified. GFP-aminopeptidase fusions will be assessed to determine
their subcellular localization. To date we have identified T-DNA knock-outs for
25% of these genes. The analysis of these mutants and others will enable us to
assess the role of each aminopeptidase gene in development and stress. Of particular
importance is the functional redundancy of gene members within each aminopeptidase
class and if divergent aminopeptidase families are functionally redundant. This
integrated biochemical, cellular and genomic approach to peptidases in a higher
eukaryote is unprecedented. Back
to Top
Selected Publications Related to
Leucine Aminopeptidase (Bibliography
page)
Back to Top 
Mechanisms of Herbivore Perception in Plants
Defense
signaling is complex and involves the intertwining of numerous signaling pathways.
While these signaling networks are being dissected for plant pathogens, relatively
little is known about the nature of the signaling networks important for plant
defense against phloem-feeding insects (Walling, 2000). We have examined plant
responses to phloem-feeding whiteflies in tomato, squash and Arabidopsis. These
projects were initiated because the silverleaf whitefly causes several novel developmental
disorders in plants including irregular ripening in tomato, stem and leaf blanching
in Arabidopsis, and leaf silvering in squash (Fig 2). Using tomato-whitefly
infestations, we were able to determine that plants perceive tissue-damaging and
phloem-feeding herbivores distinctly. Two species of phloem-feeding whiteflies
activate pathogenesis-related protein gene expression and do not activate the
wound octadecanoid pathway. JA-responsive defense signaling pathways were preferentially
activated by whiteflies (Puthoff et al, in revision). Defense responses were activated
both locally and systemically. Our studies with silverleaf whitefly (Bemisia
argentifolii) and sweetpotato whitefly (B. tabaci Type A) indicate that there
are profound changes in local and systemic gene expression in response to phloem-feeding
whiteflies. Leaf silvering develops in all leaves that develop after the silverleaf
whitefly nymphs initiate feeding. Leaf silvering is not induced by silverleaf
whitefly adults or by sweetpotato whitefly adults or nymphs. For this reason,
we searched for genes that were preferentially expressed in apical non-infested
leaves after silverleaf whitefly infestation and not after sweetpotato whitefly
infestation (van de Ven et al., 2000). Two novel genes (SLW1 and SLW3) were identified
that were not previously associated with plant defense responses and careful temporal
and spatial expression studies do not provide evidence that indicates either is
strictly correlated with silvering. SLW1 is a M20b peptidase that is preferentially
induced locally and systemically by the silverleaf whitefly, water-deficit stress,
and JA. SLW3 encodes a b-glucosidase that is preferentially expressed systemically
in response to the silverleaf whitefly. Local expression in infested leaves is
similar in response to both whitefly species. SLW3 is regulated by a novel signaling
pathway since neither JA, ABA, SA, reactive oxygen species (NO or H2O2) nor ethylene
cause SLW3 RNAs to accumulate (van de Ven et al., 2000). Furthermore, SLW3
RNAs do not accumulate in response to wounding, the cotton aphid, nematodes or
pathogens. We are using SLW3:GUS transgenic tomatoes and Arabidopsis to identify
the components of the whitefly saliva that activate SLW3 gene expression locally
and systemically. Genetic and biochemical approaches to the role of SLW1 and SLW3
proteins in defense are being pursued. The recent success in over-expressing SLW1
and SLW3 in yeast will allow the substrate specificity for each enzyme to be assessed.
Back
to Top  Selected
Publications Related to Phloem-feeding Insects (Bibliography
page)
Selected Collaborative Publications (Bibliography page)
Current
Laboratory Personnel - Fran Holzer, staff research
associate
- Sang-Youl Park, postdoc
- Virginia Alonzo,
graduate student
- Mikiko Matsui, graduate student
- Sonia
Zarate, graduate student
- Angel Chen, graduate student
- Jon
Fowler, graduate student
- Lorem Que, graduate student
Back
to Top 
|