Figure 6.
DUF581-9 weakens the interaction between KIN10 and GRIK2 in vivo. A) DUF581-9 mCherry disrupts the BiFC signal generated from the association of KIN10 VenusN173 and GRIK2-VenusC155 in planta. Proteins were transiently expressed in leaves of N. benthamiana using Agrobacterium infiltration. Yellow fluorescent protein (YFP) and red fluorescence (mCherry) was monitored by confocal microscopy 48 h post-infiltration. Upper panel shows the reconstituted YFP fluorescence in the absence or presence of a third partner. Middle panel shows mCherry fluorescence of DUF581-9 mCherry, DUF581-9C47S mCherry, or KINß2 mCherry. Lower panel shows the merge of YFP and mCherry fluorescence. The homomerization of KIN10-VenusN173 and KINß2-VenusC155 was used as control and is not negatively affected by DUF581-9 mCherry. The scale bar represents 20 µm. B) The fluorescence signal intensities of YFP and mCherry (effector) were determined along a line drawn on the confocal images using ImageJ software. Box plots represent the mean ± Sd of n = 18 to 38 individual cells for YFP fluorescence intensity and n = 17 to 28 cells for RFP fluorescence intensity (indicated as single dots). Statistically significant differences are shown as P-value between the samples against KIN10 VenusN173 and GRIK2-VenusC155 or against KIN10 VenusN173 and KINß2-VenusC155 control as determined by 1-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s multiple comparisons test. Regarding the RFP fluorescence signal, box plots represent the mean ± Sd, and letters above the bars represent a statistical significance determined by 1-way ANOVA (P < 0.05). The experiment was carried out twice with similar results.

DUF581-9 weakens the interaction between KIN10 and GRIK2 in vivo. A) DUF581-9 mCherry disrupts the BiFC signal generated from the association of KIN10 VenusN173 and GRIK2-VenusC155 in planta. Proteins were transiently expressed in leaves of N. benthamiana using Agrobacterium infiltration. Yellow fluorescent protein (YFP) and red fluorescence (mCherry) was monitored by confocal microscopy 48 h post-infiltration. Upper panel shows the reconstituted YFP fluorescence in the absence or presence of a third partner. Middle panel shows mCherry fluorescence of DUF581-9 mCherry, DUF581-9C47S mCherry, or KINß2 mCherry. Lower panel shows the merge of YFP and mCherry fluorescence. The homomerization of KIN10-VenusN173 and KINß2-VenusC155 was used as control and is not negatively affected by DUF581-9 mCherry. The scale bar represents 20 µm. B) The fluorescence signal intensities of YFP and mCherry (effector) were determined along a line drawn on the confocal images using ImageJ software. Box plots represent the mean ± Sd of n = 18 to 38 individual cells for YFP fluorescence intensity and n = 17 to 28 cells for RFP fluorescence intensity (indicated as single dots). Statistically significant differences are shown as P-value between the samples against KIN10 VenusN173 and GRIK2-VenusC155 or against KIN10 VenusN173 and KINß2-VenusC155 control as determined by 1-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s multiple comparisons test. Regarding the RFP fluorescence signal, box plots represent the mean ± Sd, and letters above the bars represent a statistical significance determined by 1-way ANOVA (P < 0.05). The experiment was carried out twice with similar results.

Close
This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

Close

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

View Article Abstract & Purchase Options

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Close