Salt Stress–Induced Disassembly of Arabidopsis CorticalMicrotubule Arrays Involves 26S Proteasome–DependentDegradation of SPIRAL1 C W
Songhu Wang,a Jasmina Kurepa,a Takashi Hashimoto,b and Jan A. Smallea,1
a Plant Physiology, Biochemistry, Molecular Biology Program, Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, University of Kentucky,
Lexington, Kentucky 40546bGraduate School of Biological Sciences, Nara Institute of Science and Technology, Ikoma, Nara 630-0192, Japan
The dynamic instability of cortical microtubules (MTs) (i.e., their ability to rapidly alternate between phases of growth and
shrinkage) plays an essential role in plant growth and development. In addition, recent studies have revealed a pivotal role
for dynamic instability in the response to salt stress conditions. The salt stress response includes a rapid depolymerization
of MTs followed by the formation of a new MT network that is believed to be better suited for surviving high salinity.
Although this initial depolymerization response is essential for the adaptation to salt stress, the underlying molecular
mechanism has remained largely unknown. Here, we show that the MT-associated protein SPIRAL1 (SPR1) plays a key role
in salt stress–induced MT disassembly. SPR1, a microtubule stabilizing protein, is degraded by the 26S proteasome, and its
degradation rate is accelerated in response to high salinity. We show that accelerated SPR1 degradation is required for a
fast MT disassembly response to salt stress and for salt stress tolerance.
INTRODUCTION
The ubiquitin/26S proteasome system (UPS) regulates many
fundamental cellular processes by controlling the degradation
rates of numerous proteins (Hershko and Ciechanover, 1998;
Vierstra, 2009). For themajority of UPS substrates, the concerted
action of E1, E2, and E3 enzymes leads to the covalent attach-
ment of a multiubiquitin chain to the protein destined for degra-
dation. The polyubiquitinated target protein is then degraded
by the 26S proteasome (Glickman, 2000), an evolutionarily
conserved multicatalytic protease that contains an enclosed
proteolytically active core particle and one or two regulatory
particles (RPs). The main roles of the RPs are in substrate rec-
ognition,which is performedbyRPnon-ATPase subunits (RPNs),
and in the unfolding and translocation of substrates to the core
particle by RP triple A ATPase subunits (RPTs) (Smalle and
Vierstra, 2004; Kurepa and Smalle, 2008).
In Arabidopsis thaliana, like in other eukaryotes, proteasome
mutants and proteasome activity inhibitors are used to uncover
the identity of UPS-regulated pathways and UPS target poteins
(Kurepa and Smalle, 2008). Loss of function of RP subunits
RPN1a and RPN10, for example, revealed that the 26S protea-
some is essential for cell division and expansion, the modulation
of responses to hormones and proteostatic drugs, and game-
tophyte development (Smalle et al., 2003; Kurepa et al., 2008,
2009a, 2009b, 2010; Wang et al., 2009). These studies also
revealed that the stress responses of rpn1a and rpn10 mutant
plants are altered: compared with the wild type, proteasome
mutants are more tolerant of oxidative stress and less tolerant of
protein misfolding stresses such as heat shock and salt stress
(Smalle et al., 2003; Kurepa et al., 2008; Wang et al., 2009).
The most frequently used proteasome inhibitor is MG132, a
reversible, cell-permeable peptidyl aldehyde that inhibits the
proteasome-specific chymotrypsin-like protease b5 (Lee and
Goldberg, 1998). Studies using MG132 have shown that the
UPS is involved in the regulation of plant cell microtubule (MT)
networks (Yanagawa et al., 2002; Oka et al., 2004; Sheng et al.,
2006; S. Wang et al., 2011). MTs are polymers of a/b-tubulin
heterodimers, which are incorporated into MTs directionally so
thata-tubulin is exposed at the so-called lagging (2) andb-tubulin
at the leading (+) ends. MTs play important roles in numerous
cellular processes, including cell division and directional cell
expansion (Nogales, 2001; Sedbrook and Kaloriti, 2008).
The polymerization-depolymerization dynamics of MTs are
essential for their functionality in cellular processes, and they
include two types of GTP hydrolysis-dependent dynamic behav-
iors: dynamic instability and treadmilling. Treadmilling is the net
growth of MTs at their (+) ends and shortening at their (2) ends,
and dynamic instability is the switching between episodes of
growth (polymer assembly) and shortening (polymer disassembly)
at the (+) ends. The transition from growing to shortening is a
dynamic instability parameter called catastrophe, and transition
from shortening to growing is known as rescue. Growth, shrink-
age, catastrophe, and rescue rates depend on MT-associated
proteins (MAPs) and, in particular, a subclass of MAPs called
1Address correspondence to [email protected] author responsible for distribution of materials integral to thefindings presented in this article in accordance with the policy describedin the Instructions for Authors (www.plantcell.org) is: Jan A. Smalle([email protected]).CSome figures in this article are displayed in color online but in blackand white in the print edition.WOnline version contains Web-only data.www.plantcell.org/cgi/doi/10.1105/tpc.111.089920
The Plant Cell, Vol. 23: 3412–3427, September 2011, www.plantcell.org ã 2011 American Society of Plant Biologists. All rights reserved.
(+)-end-tracking proteins (+TIPs) (Hirokawa, 1994; Mandelkow
and Mandelkow, 1995; Lloyd and Hussey, 2001; Schuyler and
Pellman, 2001; Sedbrook, 2004; Hamada, 2007; Sedbrook and
Kaloriti, 2008; Lyle et al., 2009a, 2009b).
A large number of +TIPs havebeen identified, and someof them
are found inwidelydivergedspecies, suggesting that they regulate
a basic, evolutionarily conserved component of the dynamic
instability process (Bisgrove et al., 2004). For example, Arabidop-
sis has functional homologs of end binding protein 1 (EB1) and
cytoplasmic linker-associated protein 1 (CLASP1), which were
first identified in human cells (Chan et al., 2003;Mathur et al., 2003;
Galjart, 2005; Vaughan, 2005; Ambrose et al., 2007; Kirik et al.,
2007; Bisgroveet al., 2008;Komaki et al., 2010).Other +TIPs, such
asSPIRAL1 (SPR1), are found only in plants (Nakajima et al., 2004,
2006; Sedbrook et al., 2004). Because plants overexpressing
SPR1 have increased tolerance to MT-destabilizing drugs, and
spr1 mutants have morphological defects consistent with altered
MT stability, it has been concluded that this protein, similar to EB1
and CLASP1, is important for the regulation of dynamic instability
(Nakajima et al., 2004, 2006; Sedbrook et al., 2004; Abe and
Hashimoto, 2005; Ishida et al., 2007).
Similar to other eukaryotes, the structure of the plant MT cy-
toskeleton ismodulated not only by various developmental cues,
but also in response to environmental signals and stress condi-
tions (Smertenko et al., 1997; Himmelspach et al., 1999; Mathur
and Chua, 2000; Wang and Nick, 2001; Abdrakhamanova et al.,
2003; Van Bruaene et al., 2004; C. Wang et al., 2007, 2011;
Hamant et al., 2008). For example, short-term salt stress pro-
motes the reorientation of MTs in maize (Zea mays) roots from
transverse to parallel relative to the longitudinal axis and in
tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) BY-2 cells from a structured to a
seemingly random organization (Blancaflor and Hasenstein,
1995; Dhonukshe et al., 2003). Long-term salt stress also affects
cortical MT organization in Arabidopsis and suppresses the
right-handed helical growth of spr1 mutants (Shoji et al., 2006).
Furthermore, prolonged exposure to salt stress conditions was
shown to trigger a biphasic response starting with a massive MT
depolymerization phase followed by the formation of new MT
networks that are thought to be better suited for surviving high
salinity (Wang et al., 2007). Because treatments with a MT-
destabilizing drug improved survival and growth under salt stress
conditions and treatments with aMT-stabilizing drug caused salt
stress hypersensitivity, the initial MT depolymerization response
is believed to be essential for maintaining salt stress tolerance
(Wang et al., 2007).
The specific mechanism that mediates the initial, salt stress–
induced MT destabilization is currently not well understood.
Because all tested proteasome mutants are hypersensitive to
salt stress, we hypothesized that the MT reorganization needed
for salt stress tolerancemight be impaired in these lines due to an
altered dynamic instability of MTs. Since the dynamic instability
is regulated by the action of MAPs and in particular +TIPs, we
tested if one of these proteins is conditionally degraded by the
proteasome to allowMT restructuring required for an optimal salt
stress response. Here, we show that in Arabidopsis, salt stress
accelerates the 26S proteasome–dependent degradation of
SPR1 and that this facilitates MT disassembly and promotes
salt stress tolerance.
Figure 1. 26S Proteasome Mutants Have Increased Tolerance to MT-
Destabilizing Drugs.
(A) and (B) Effect of propyzamide (A) and oryzalin (B) on primary root
elongation in the wild type (Col-0) and proteasome mutants rpn1a-4,
rpt2a-2, rpn10-1, and rpn12a-1. Seedlings grown on MS/2 medium for
5 d were transferred to media containing the denoted doses of propy-
zamide or oryzalin. The increase in root length was measured after 3 d of
treatment. The root length of untreated seedlings of each genotype was
set at 100%, andmean values6 SD (n$ 25) are shown as percentages of
the root length of the respective controls. The difference in root length
between Col-0 and rpn1a-4, rpn10-1, or rpn12a-1 was statistically sig-
nificant for all tested doses (n $ 25, P < 0.0001; two-way ANOVA fol-
lowed by Bonferroni multiple comparisons post-test). For clarity, only the
statistical significance for Col-0 versus rpt2a-2 is marked in the graphs
(*P < 0.05).
(C) Effects of 4 mM propyzamide on primary root morphogenesis.
The experimental conditions and timeline were the same as in (A).
Bar = 250 mm.
Proteasomal Degradation of SPR1 3413
RESULTS
26S ProteasomeMutants Have Increased Tolerance to
MT-Destabilizing Drugs
To assay the stability of cortical MTs in 26S proteasomemutants,
we first tested the responses of rpn1a-4, rpt2a-2, rpn10-1, and
rpn12a-1 mutants to the MT-destabilizing drugs oryzalin, which
binds to a-tubulin, and propyzamide, which binds to b-tubulin
(Nakamura et al., 2004; Lyons-Abbott et al., 2010). We showed
previously that the total 26S proteasome activity in the four
tested proteasome mutants is affected to different levels, with
rpt2a-2 carrying the weakest and rpn10-1 the strongest defect in
26S proteasome function (Kurepa et al., 2008). We determined
the effects of MT-destabilizing drugs by measuring their inhibi-
tion of root elongation and their promotion of root tip swelling,
two plant growth responses that were shown to be caused byMT
disassembly (Baskin et al., 1994).
All proteasome mutants were more tolerant to both propyza-
mide and oryzalin (Figures 1A and 1B). The strongest mutant,
rpn10-1, was the most tolerant, whereas the weakest mutant,
rpt2a-2, showed a statistically significant increase in propyza-
mide and oryzalin tolerance only at a single dose (6 mM for
propyzamide, P < 0.05; 100 nM for oryzalin, P < 0.05). In addi-
tion, the propyzamide tolerance of the double mutant rpn1a-4
rpn10-1 was further increased compared with the respective
single mutants (see Supplemental Figure 1 online).
We also analyzed the morphology of propyzamide-treated
roots. Earlier reports have shown that seedlings grown on media
supplemented with MT-destabilizing drugs contain swollen pri-
mary roots (Furutani et al., 2000). After a 3-d-long treatment with
4 mMpropyzamide, root swelling was obvious in the Columbia-0
(Col-0) plants, whereas the diameter of primary roots of all
proteasome mutants did not increase (Figure 1C; see Supple-
mental Figure 1C online).
Changes in rpn10-1MT Dynamics
To analyze the stability ofMTs in proteasomemutants further, we
compared the dynamics of individual MTs in Col-0 and rpn10-1
backgrounds (Figure 2). Previous studies have shown that green
fluorescent protein (GFP) fusions with a- (GFP-TUA6) or b-tubulin
(GFP-TUB6) are incorporated into MTs and can be used to
visualizeMT dynamics in vivo (Ueda et al., 1999; Nakamura et al.,
2004; Abe and Hashimoto, 2005). However, whereas GFP-
TUB6–labeled MTs have wild-type properties, the incorporation
of GFP-TUA6 changes MT dynamics and induces right-handed
helical growth (Nakamura et al., 2004; Abe and Hashimoto,
2005). Thus, we chose to introduce the 35S:GFP-TUB6 trans-
gene into the rpn10-1 mutant and analyzed MT dynamics using
confocal time-lapse imaging.
Kymographs of individual MT (+)-ends and representative life
history plots showed that in rpn10-1, the MT growth phase was
longer and the shrinkage phase was shorter than in the wild type
(Figure 2). Indeed, most of the parameters of MT dynamic
instability were altered in the rpn10-1 background (Table 1).
The average growth rate of the leading ends and the frequency of
catastrophe in rpn10-1 were significantly lower than in Col-0,
while the frequency of rescue events in rpn10-1 was increased.
Thus, individual MTs in rpn10-1 were less dynamic and more
prone to polymerization. In contrast with the (+)-end, there was
no significant difference in (2)-end dynamics between rpn10-1
and the wild type (Table 1), implying that it is the process of
dynamic instability and not treadmilling that was affected by
the inhibition of proteasome activity. These results combined
with the increased tolerance of proteasome mutants to MT-
destabilizing drugs indicated that 26S proteasome–dependent
proteolysis plays an important role in the regulation of MT dy-
namic instability.
SPR1 Mediates the Tolerance of Proteasome Mutants
to Propyzamide
Previous studies showed that overexpression of the plant-
specific +TIP SPR1 leads to increased propyzamide tolerance
Figure 2. MT Plus-End Dynamics Are Altered in the rpn10-1 Mutant.
(A) Kymograph of a 160-s-long recording showing (+)-end dynamics of
individual MTs. Four-day-old seedlings expressing 35S:GFP-TUB6 in the
Col-0 and rpn10-1 backgrounds were used for time-lapse confocal
imaging. Epidermal cells of upper hypocotyl regions were photographed
every 4 s. Bar = 5 mm.
(B) The life history plots (length versus time) of three GFP-TUB6–labeled
MTs in Col-0 and three GFP-TUB6–labeled MTs in the rpn10-1 back-
ground. MT length was measured from confocal micrographs using
Image J.
[See online article for color version of this figure.]
3414 The Plant Cell
(Nakajima et al., 2004). Since proteasomemutants are also more
tolerant of MT-destabilizing drugs (Figure 1) and have alteredMT
dynamics, (Figure 2), we tested whether SPR1 is a 26S protea-
some target and whether its stabilization in proteasome mutants
can explain the observed phenotypes.
To assay SPR1 stability, we used cycloheximide (CHX) to
inhibit de novo protein synthesis. After a 12-h-long CHX treat-
ment, the SPR1 level was reduced to;30% of the control. This
decrease was blocked by the proteasome inhibitor MG132,
suggesting that SPR1 is an unstable protein that is targeted for
26S proteasome–dependent proteolysis (Figure 3A). Indeed, the
SPR1 level was increased in 26S proteasome mutants rpn1a-4
and rpn10-1 and was even more abundant in the rpn1a-4
rpn10-1 doublemutant (Figure 3B). The SPR1mRNA abundance
remained unchanged in the proteasome mutant backgrounds,
confirming that the increase in SPR1 protein level was caused by
a posttranscriptional mechanism (see Supplemental Figure 2
online). Finally, CHX chase immunoblotting analyses (Yewdell
et al., 2011) showed that the SPR1 degradation rate was de-
creased in proteasome mutant backgrounds (Figures 3C and
3D), confirming a role for the UPS in regulating SPR1 abundance.
To test if SPR1 accumulation is a cause for the increased
tolerance of proteasome mutants to MT-destabilizing drugs, we
crossed the spr1-3mutation into the rpn1a-4 and rpn10-1mutant
backgrounds (Figure 4; see Supplemental Figure 3 online).
Analyses of the root tip morphology in propyzamide-treated
double mutants showed that the reduced root tip swelling in
proteasome mutants was suppressed by the spr1-3 mutation
(Figure 4A). To quantify the effect of the spr1-3 mutation, we
measured the width of the primary root in the elongation zone
(Figure 4B). As expected, the propyzamide treatment did not
promote any substantial root swelling in the proteasome mu-
tants. The spr1-3 mutation caused a mild increase in root width
compared with the wild type (344.56 5mmand 372.96 7mm for
Col-0 and spr1-3, respectively; n = 25, P < 0.001). By contrast,
the root width of both rpn1a-4 spr1-3 and rpn10-1 spr1-3 double
mutants was strongly increased compared with the respective
single proteasome mutants (n = 25, P < 0.001), although the
increases in swelling did not reach thewild-type level (P < 0.01 for
rpn1a-4 spr1-3 and P < 0.001 for rpn10-1 spr1-3 compared with
Col-0). We concluded that the removal of SPR1 suppressed the
propyzamide tolerance of proteasome mutants but did not fully
revert this phenotype to the wild-type level, suggesting the
existence of other MT-stabilizing proteins that are also degraded
by the 26S proteasome.
The root elongation assay confirmed that SPR1 contributes to
the propyzamide tolerance of proteasome mutants (Figure 4C).
The rpn1a-4 spr1-3 and rpn10-1 spr1-3 double mutants dis-
played an increase in right-handed helical growth (see Sup-
plemental Figure 3 online). For example, the right-handed root
skewing of spr1-3 was enhanced in both the rpn1a-4 and
rpn10-1 mutant backgrounds. This was the most striking in
rpn1a-4 spr1-3 seedlings that had upward growing roots (see
Supplemental Figure 3C online). However, low propyzamide
doses fully suppressed the enhanced root skewing phenotype in
both double mutants (see Supplemental Figure 4 online), allow-
ing us to compare the propyzamide tolerance levels of all lines
by the root elongation assay. Similar to the root tip swelling
response, the root elongation assay showed that spr1-3 sup-
presses the propyzamide tolerance of both the rpn1a-4 and
rpn10-1 mutants (Figure 4C).
To analyze directly the effects of spr1-3 on MT stability, we
attempted to cross the 35S:GFP-TUB6 transgene into the spr1-3
and rpn10-1 spr1-3 mutants. We were unable to isolate spr1-3
or rpn10-1 spr1-3 mutants expressing GFP-TUB6 in spite of
screening more than 1000 F2 seedlings, and we hypothesized
that the 35S:GFP-TUB6 transgene is located in the proximity of
the SPR1 locus. However, analysis of the 35S:GFP-TUB6 locus
revealed that the T-DNA is not linked to SPR1 (data not shown).
The reason GFP-TUB6 expression and the spr1-3 mutation are
incompatible is currently unknown. As an alternative, we intro-
duced the 35S:GFP-TUA6 transgene into the spr1-3 and rpn10-1
spr1-3 mutants. To assay the MT stability in these lines, we
treated 4-d-old seedlings with a high dose of propyzamide to
ensure a fast and complete MT disruption (20 mM propyzamide
for 1 h) and analyzed epidermal cells of the upper hypocotyl
regions by confocalmicroscopy (Figure 4D). In rpn10-1, theGFP-
TUA6–labeled cortical MTs remained partially intact, while MTs
in the wild-type and rpn10-1 spr1-3 cells were disrupted, and the
GFP signal was localized in randomly dispersed aggregates.
Table 1. Dynamic Instability Parameters in Col-0 and rpn10-1
Dynamic Parameters
(+)-Ends (�)-Ends
Col-0 rpn10-1 Col-0 rpn10-1
Growth rate (mm/min) 5.44 6 4.61 4.04 6 2.73* 1.91 6 1.15 1.72 6 1.03
Shrinkage rate (mm/min) 10.3 6 8.89 8.91 6 8.44 3.53 6 4.16 3.82 6 4.17
Catastrophe (events/second) 0.041 0.030* 0.212 0.196
Rescue (events/second) 0.096 0.141* 0.047 0.051
Time spent on growth 67.2% 76.6% 9.3% 10.7%
Time spent on pause 9.6% 11.2% 48.4% 48.7%
Time spent on shrinkage 20.4% 12.3% 42.4% 40.6%
Dynamicity (mm/min) 5.91 6 1.46 4.19 6 2.41* 1.67 6 1.92 1.99 6 1.28
MT dynamic instability parameters were quantified from confocal micrographs. Velocities were calculated from 38 leading and 22 lagging ends for
35S:GFP-TUB6 in Col-0 and 45 leading and 32 lagging ends for 35S:GFP-TUB6 in the rpn10-1 background. Total measurements include 1111 and
1763 velocities (4-s intervals) for GFP-TUB6 in Col-0 and rpn10-1, respectively. Dynamic parameters are expressed as mean 6 SD. Statistical
significance was calculated using Student’s t test comparing the mutant and wild-type values (*P < 0.05).
Proteasomal Degradation of SPR1 3415
Collectively, these experiments suggested that the stabilization
of SPR1 in proteasome mutants is a cause for both their in-
creased tolerance to MT-destabilizing drugs and altered MT
dynamicity.
Salt Stress Promotes Proteolysis of SPR1
Based on earlier reports of the salt stress hypersensivitiy of 26S
proteasome mutants (Smalle et al., 2003; Wang et al., 2009) and
the fact that salt stress tolerance requires MT disassembly
(Wang et al., 2007), we hypothesized that loss of proteasome
function increases salt stress sensitivity by stabilizing SPR1,
which in turn leads to increased MT stability. To test this, we first
determined if salt stress leads to a conditional 26S proteasome–
dependent degradation of SPR1, which could facilitate the re-
arrangement of cortical MTs needed for salt tolerance.
Prolonged treatment (16 h) of 4-d-old Col-0 seedlings with 150
mM NaCl caused a decrease in SPR1 level, and this decrease
was blocked by MG132 (Figure 5A). CHX-chase immunoblotting
analyses showed that a 16-h-long NaCl treatment led to an
;80% reduction of the SPR1 level in Col-0, whereas the SPR1
level in rpn1a-4 and rpn10-1 mutants was reduced by only;30
and ;20%, respectively (Figures 5B and 5C). These results
indicated that the salt stress–induced decrease in SPR1 level
was a result of proteasome-dependent degradation.
During treatmentswith a higher concentration of salt (200mM),
degradation of SPR1 was detectable already after 3 h of incu-
bation (see Supplemental Figures 5A to 5C online). To test if high
salt concentrations promote SPR1 degradation via a global
increase in 26S proteasome–dependent proteolysis, we moni-
tored total proteasome activity by analyzing the abundance of
polyubiquitinated proteins and by measuring proteasomal che-
motryptic activity (see Supplemental Figures 5D and 5E online).
After 5 h of exposure to 200 mM NaCl, we observed a significant
decrease in the SPR1protein level, no change in the overall levels
of ubiquitinated proteins, and a mild but significant decrease
in proteasome activity. We concluded that the accelerated
proteasome-dependent SPR1 degradation during salt stress is
not caused by a general increase in proteasome activity but is
more likely the result of a specific destabilizationmechanism that
is activated by salt stress. Finally, we confirmed that the SPR1
depletion in response to salt is indeed the result of a posttrans-
criptional mechanism by observing that the SPR1 mRNA level
did not change in response to salt stress treatments (see Sup-
plemental Figure 5F online).
Previous studies have shown that cortical MT arrays depoly-
merize in response to salt stress (Wang et al., 2007). Since the
molecular mechanisms that govern this process were unknown,
it remained possible that the salt stress–induced degradation of
SPR1 reflects not a direct effect on SPR1, but an indirect effect
caused by the MT disassembly. For example, the MT disassem-
bly might increase the amount of free SPR1 that could be more
susceptible to degradation than the tubulin-bound version. To
distinguish between these possibilities, we monitored the SPR1
level in Col-0 plants treatedwith propyzamide. In Col-0 seedlings
treated for 3 h with 10 mM propyzamide, the cortical MTs were
depolymerized (see Supplemental Figure 6 online), but the SPR1
level remained the same as in the untreated control (Figure 5D).
The propyzamide treatment also did not influence the salt stress–
induced degradation of SPR1 (Figure 5D).
In addition to ionic stress, high salinity is also known to cause
osmotic stress (Zhu, 2001). To test if osmotic stress influences
the stability of SPR1, we treated Col-0 seedlings with high doses
of the osmolytemannitol (Figure 5E). Themannitol treatments did
not affect SPR1 stability, suggesting that the signal triggering
SPR1 destabilization was specifically ionic stress (Figure 5F). We
concluded that salt stress, but not osmotic stress or MT disas-
sembly per se, promotes the 26S proteasome–dependent deg-
radation of SPR1.
Figure 3. SPR1 Is a 26S Proteasome Target.
(A) Immunoblotting analyses using anti-SPR1 and anti-GS antisera.
Seven-day-old seedlings were treated with 100 mM MG132 and/or 200
mM CHX for 16 h and used for the extraction of total protein. The anti-GS
sera recognizes both the chloroplastic (45 kD) and cytosolic (40 kD) GS
isoforms.
(B) SPR1 levels in 8-d-old Col-0, rpn1a-4, rpn10-1, and rpn1a-4 rpn10-1
seedlings. Anti-RPN1 and anti-RPN10 sera were used to confirm the
genotype of proteasome mutants.
(C) Representative CHX-chase immunoblots. The stability of SPR1 was
tested on total protein extract of 10-d-old wild-type and mutant seed-
lings treated with 200 mM CHX for the indicated time periods.
(D) Quantification of SPR1 stability in CHX-treated Col-0, rpn1a-4, and
rpn10-1 plants. Immunoblots, representatives of which are shown in (C),
were used to quantify signal intensities. The average signal intensity of
the zero time point sample for each line was set to 100%, and the mean
values 6 SD (n = 3) are shown as percentages of the respective control.
The asterisks represent the statistical significance of the difference be-
tween degradation rates in Col-0 and both proteasome mutants (****P <
0.0001; ANOVA followed by Bonferroni multiple comparisons post-test).
[See online article for color version of this figure.]
3416 The Plant Cell
SPR1 Stabilization Causes Salt Stress Hypersensitivity
To test if SPR1 stabilization causes the salt hypersensitivity of 26S
proteasome mutants (Smalle et al., 2003; Wang et al., 2009), we
first analyzed if the increased MT stability is responsible for the
changes in salt tolerance (Figure 6A), then determined the salt
tolerance levels of rpn1a-4 spr1-3 and rpn10-1 spr1-3 mutants
(Figures 6B to 6D), and finally compared the effects of salt stress
on the MT arrays of rpn10-1 and rpn10-1 spr1-3 cells (Figure 7).
To test the relationship between MT stability and salt tolerance,
we analyzed the effects of combined salt stress and propyzamide
treatments on the root elongation of rpn1a-4 and rpn10-1mutants
(Figure 6A). In the absence of propyzamide, root length of wild-
type plants grown on 100 mM NaCl was ;70% of the control,
whereas the root length of proteasome mutants was reduced to
;50%. As expected, lowdoses of propyzamide counteracted the
salt-induced inhibition of root elongation in all lines. However,
whereas 1mMpropyzamide led to an 8% increase in root length in
the wild type (statistically nonsignificant, P > 0.05, n$ 15; analysis
of variance [ANOVA]withBonferroni post-test), the increase in root
length in the proteasomemutants was;25% (P < 0.001, n$ 15).
Thus, since lowdosesof anMT-destabilizingdrug reverted the salt
hypersensitivity of proteasome mutants to wild-type levels, we
concluded that the increased MT stability in proteasome mutants
is indeed responsible for their salt hypersensitivity.
This conclusion, together with our observation that spr1-3
suppressed the increased MT stability in rpn1a-4 and rpn10-1
mutants (Figure 4), prompted us to test if the spr1-3mutation also
Figure 4. spr1-3 Suppresses the Propyzamide Tolerance of Proteasome Mutants.
(A) Effects of 4 mM propyzamide on primary root morphogenesis in Col-0, rpn1a-4, spr1-3, and the double mutant rpn1a-4 spr1-3. Five-day-old
seedlings were transferred to fresh MS/2 medium or MS/2 medium with propyzamide. The seedlings were grown on vertically positioned plates for 3 d
and then photographed. Bar = 1 mm.
(B) Effects of 4 mM propyzamide on root width. Seedlings were grown and treated as in (A). The width of primary roots at the elongation zone was
measured from micrographs using ImageJ. The significance was analyzed using ANOVA followed by Bonferroni multiple comparisons post-test.
Crosses represent the significance of the differences between the untreated Col-0 and untreated mutant lines, and asterisks mark the significance
between the treated Col-0 and treated mutant lines (**P < 0.01; ††† and ***P < 0.001; and †††† and ****P < 0.0001).
(C) Root lengths of 5-d-old seedlings grown on MS/2 media with 4 mM propyzamide (****P < 0.0001; significance for Col-0 versus mutants). The
statistical analyses and data presentation are as in (B).
(D) In vivo analyses of the MT-destabilizing effect of 20 mMpropyzamide in the Col-0 wild type and in the rpn10-1 and rpn10-1 spr1-3mutants. The 35S:
GFP-TUA6 transgene was crossed into the rpn10-1 and rpn10-1 spr1-3 mutant backgrounds, and the GFP-TUA6–labeled cortical MTs were analyzed
by confocal microscopy. Hypocotyl epidermal cells of 4-d-old seedlings treated for 1 h are shown. Bar = 20 mm.
[See online article for color version of this figure.]
Proteasomal Degradation of SPR1 3417
suppresses the salt hypersensitivity of proteasome mutants
(Figures 6B and 6D). Salt stress induces a range ofmorphological
alternations in both the aerial parts of the plant and the roots. For
example, NaCl treatments lead to reductions in root length and
lateral root number, a decrease in leaf and petiole size, and a
delay in leaf emergence (Burssens et al., 2000). Furthermore,
prolonged or intense salt stress treatments cause leaf chloro-
sis, bleaching, and necrosis. All adverse effects of salt stress,
including leaf necrosis and the inhibition of root and rosette
growth, were apparent at lower doses in rpn10-1 compared with
the wild type and were suppressed by the spr1-3 mutation
(Figure 6B). The fresh weight of rpn1a-4 spr1-3 and rpn10-1
spr1-3 plants grown for 2 weeks on salt-containing media was
significantly increased compared with the single rpn1a-4 and
rpn10-1 mutants but did not reach the wild-type levels (Figure
6C). The effects of NaCl on root elongation were measured after
3 d of treatment (Figure 6D). On the control media, spr1-3 sup-
pressed root elongation both in the wild type and in proteasome
mutants, probably because it caused the right-hand skewing of
roots. On NaCl-containing media, root elongation of rpn1a-4
spr1-3 and rpn10-1 spr1-3 plants was increased compared with
the respective single 26S proteasome mutants but again did not
reach the length of the wild-type roots treated with the same
dose of NaCl (Figure 6D). Thus, the spr1-3 mutation did indeed
suppress the salt hypersensitivity of proteasome mutants, but
this suppression was partial.
Next, we performed a time-course analysis of the impact of
salt stress on GFP-TUA6–labeled MT arrays in wild-type, spr1-3,
rpn10-1, and rpn10-1 spr1-3 plants (Figure 7). In the wild type,
MT disassembly was nearly complete after a 4-h-long exposure
to 200mMNaCl (Figure 7A). By contrast, the cortical MT network
in rpn10-1 cells remained largely intact up until 6 h into the
treatment. The spr1-3 mutation suppressed the delayed MT
depolymerization in the rpn10-1 mutant, but similarly to the
effects of spr1-3 on whole-seedling salt tolerance, it did not fully
revert the MT disassembly rate back to the wild-type level.
Analyses of the number ofMTs per unit length confirmed both the
delayed salt response in rpn10-1 and the partial suppression of
this delay by the spr1-3mutation (Figure 7B). We concluded that
the SPR1 stabilization in proteasome mutants causes salt hy-
persensitivity by slowing down the salt stress–induced depoly-
merization of MTs. However, since the proteasome mutant salt
stress responses did not completely revert back to the wild-type
level when the spr1-3 mutation was introduced, we also con-
cluded that SPR1 is not the only proteasome target that inhibits
salt stress–induced MT depolymerization.
Figure 5. Salt Stress Promotes 26S Proteasome–Dependent Proteolysis of SPR1.
(A) Immunoblotting analyses of SPR1 in Col-0 seedlings treated with NaCl and MG132. Four-day-old seedlings were treated for 16 h with 150 mM NaCl
alone or 150 mM NaCl and 100 mM MG132.
(B) CHX-chase immunoblot. Ten-day-old seedlings were transferred to liquid MS/2 media containing 200 mM CHX and 200 mM NaCl. Seedlings were
treated for the indicated times.
(C) Quantification of immunoblots represented by those in (B). The signals of the untreated samples were set at 100%. Data are shown as mean values
6 SD (n = 3) as percentages of the respective controls. The asterisks represent the statistical significance of the difference between the degradation
rates in Col-0 versus rpn10-1 and rpn1a-4 (****P < 0.0001; ANOVA followed by Bonferroni multiple comparisons post-test).
(D) and (E) Immunoblotting analyses of SPR1 in Col-0 seedlings treated with the denoted doses of NaCl and (D) propyzamide or mannitol (E). Four-day-
old seedlings were transferred to water containing the test compounds, treated for 3 h, and used for the isolation of total proteins.
[See online article for color version of this figure.]
3418 The Plant Cell
The fast, salt-induced MT depolymerization response in cells
of the wild type and rpn10-1 spr1-3 double mutant was followed
by the start of new MT formation (8-h time point; Figure 7). By
contrast, after 8 h of treatment, the MT disassembly was just
completed and no distinct MTs could be detected in the rpn10-1
seedlings. This confirms an earlier report stating that fast MT
disassembly in response to salt stress is required for the timely
formation of new MT networks potentially better suited to toler-
ate high salt concentrations (Wang et al., 2007).
Additional proof that increased SPR1 abundance is a cause for
salt stress hypersensitivity was obtained by analyzing transgenic
plants that overexpress SPR1. In theory, plants that overexpress
SPR1 should respond to salt stress similarly to proteasome
mutants in which the SPR1 level is increased because of a
reduced degradation rate. Previous work already showed that
SPR1 overexpression indeed leads to increased tolerance to
propyzamide in shoot organs (Nakajima et al., 2004). Here, we
show that increased tolerance to propyzamide can also be
observed in the root-swelling assay and is indeed associated
with salt stress hypersensitivity (see Supplemental Figure 7
online). Collectively, these results confirm the importance of
SPR1 removal for maintaining salt stress tolerance.
MG132 Promotes MT Stability and Salt
Stress Hypersensitivity
Finally, to independently test the role of SPR1 proteolysis in the
salt stress–induced restructuring of cortical MT arrays, we ana-
lyzed the combined effects of salt, propyzamide, and MG132 on
Col-0 and spr1-3 seedlings (Figure 8).
Similar to the genetic suppression of proteasome activity,
pretreatment of Col-0 seedlings with MG132 inhibited the
propyzamide-induced swelling of root tips (Figure 8A). Although
MG132 also inhibited the swelling of spr1-3 roots, this effect
was not as strong as in the wild type (Figure 8A). MG132 also
counteracted the inhibitory effect of propyzamide on root elon-
gation (Figure 8B). Treatment with either MG132 or propyzamide
inhibited root elongation in Col-0 and spr1-3 seedlings. However,
while MG132 reduced the root lengths to ;85% of the respec-
tive controls, the propyzamide treatment caused a more severe
growth inhibition (to;30% of the control values). Roots of Col-0
plants treated with both MG132 and propyzamide were ;50%
longer than when treated with propyzamide alone, indicating
that the proteasome inhibitor counteracts the effect of the MT
destabilizing drug. Furthermore, this MG132 effect was also
Figure 6. spr1-3 Suppresses the Salt Hypersensitivity of 26S Proteasome Mutants.
(A) Salt hypersensitivity of proteasome mutants was suppressed by propyzamide treatments. Five-day-old seedlings grown on MS/2 medium were
transferred to fresh MS/2 plates or MS/2 plates with 100 mM NaCl and the indicated doses of propyzamide. Plates were positioned vertically, and the
root lengths were measured after 3 d. Data represent relative root length (n$ 20) with SD. The average root length of untreated Col-0 seedlings was set
at 100%.
(B) Five-day-old seedlings grown on MS/2 medium were transferred to fresh MS/2 medium or MS/2 containing 100 mM NaCl. Test plates were
positioned vertically, and plants were grown for 2 weeks. The arrows highlight necrotic spots in the rpn10-1 mutant grown on 100 mM NaCl.
(C) and (D) The salt tolerance levels were quantified by comparing the fresh weight after a 2-week-long treatment (C) and root lengths after a 3-d-long
treatment (D). Data are shown as mean values6 SD of three independent experiments (n$ 15 for each). The asterisks represent the significances of the
differences between the double mutants and the respective single proteasome mutants and were calculated using ANOVA followed by Bonferroni
multiple comparisons post-test (****P < 0.0001, ***P < 0.001, and **P < 0.01).
Proteasomal Degradation of SPR1 3419
partially attenuated in the spr1-3mutant, implying a role for SPR1
in the MG132-induced MT stabilization (Figure 8B).
To test if MG132 also increases salt sensitivity, we analyzed
the response of GFP-TUB6–labeled MT arrays and the growth of
Col-0 and spr1-3 on medium supplemented with 200 mM NaCl
(Figures 8C to 8E). Indeed, MG132 suppressed the salt-induced
depolymerization of cortical MTs (Figure 8C) and decreased the
salt tolerance of wild-type seedlings (Figures 8D and 8E). How-
ever, compared with the wild type, MG132 was less effective in
suppressing leaf expansion (Figure 8D) and root elongation of
salt-treated spr1-3 seedlings (Figure 8E), confirming that the salt
hypersensitivity caused by proteasome inhibition requires SPR1
function. Thus, we find that the increased MT stability and salt
stress hypersensitivity of proteasome mutants can be phe-
nocopied by treating wild-type plants with the proteasome
inhibitor MG132.
DISCUSSION
Posttranscriptional and, in particular, proteasome-dependent
regulation of tubulin/MT system dynamics have been described
in considerably greater detail in animals than in plants. MT
dynamics depend on the availability of tubulin heterodimers and
on the activities of MAPs, and recent studies have shown that
proteasome-dependent protein degradation determines the sta-
bility of bothMT dynamics determinants. For example, the role of
the proteasome and tubulin-specific chaperones in the degra-
dation of tubulins released by MT depolymerization has been
documented in animals (Bhamidipati et al., 2000; Ren et al.,
2003; Bartolini et al., 2005; Voloshin et al., 2010). Depolymeriza-
tion of MTs also leads to the proteasome-dependent degrada-
tion of tubulins in plants, but the molecular players that prime
tubulin for proteolysis and that deliver tubulin heterodimers (or
monomer-chaperone complexes) to the proteasome are still
unidentified (S. Wang et al., 2011).
In animals, the proteasome has also been shown to regulate
MT dynamics by influencing the stability of MAPs (David et al.,
2002; Petrucelli et al., 2004; Peth et al., 2007; Poruchynsky et al.,
2008; Ban et al., 2009). Our study extends this observation to
plants and reveals that proteasome-dependent stability control
is essential for the restructuring of MT arrays and the fine-tuning
of MT dynamics. We show that genetic and pharmacological
inactivation of 26S proteasome activity in Arabidopsis leads to
an increase in MT stability and, consequently, to an improved
tolerance of MT destabilizing drugs. The increased MT stability
in proteasome mutants was largely the result of stabilization of
the plant-specific +TIP SPR1. Thus, the accumulation of SPR1
resulting from either overexpression of the SPR1 transgene
(Nakajima et al., 2004) or a reduced degradation rate (this study)
is sufficient to promote increased MT stability in plant cells.
Although the increased stability of SPR1 in 26S proteasome
mutants implies that this MAP is targeted for degradation in
a ubiquitin-dependent manner, we were unable to detect any
candidate ubiquitinated SPR1 forms with higher molecular
weights. Similar results were described for several other known
proteasome targets (Dill et al., 2001; Lopez-Molina et al., 2001;
Xie et al., 2002; Smalle et al., 2003; Gagne et al., 2004), sug-
gesting that the detection of ubiquitin conjugates can be tech-
nically challenging. Proteomic studies have shown that only a
very small fraction of any given 26S proteasome target protein
exists in its ubiquitinated form (Kaiser and Tagwerker, 2005).
Furthermore, it can be envisioned that even upon partial stabi-
lization in proteasome mutant backgrounds, the ubiquitinated
SPR1 forms remain undetectable due to the actions of ubiquitin
proteases that are known to revert a substantial fraction of
Figure 7. SPR1 Stabilization in rpn10-1 Delays the Salt-Induced Disas-
sembly of Cortical MT Arrays.
(A) Visualization of GFP-TUA6–labeled cortical MTs in upper hypocotyl
epidermal cells from 4-d-old Col-0, rpn10-1, and rpn10-1 spr1-3 seed-
lings treated with 200 mM NaCl for the indicated times. Bar = 10 mm.
(B) The density of cortical MTs per unit length in upper hypocotyl cells was
determined by counting theMTs crossing the longitudinal axis of a cell. For
each line and treatment, a minimum of 32 hypocotyl cells from five
separate seedlings was photographed and used for measurements. The
asterisks represent the significance of the difference between Col-0 and
the mutants treated for the same time and were calculated using ANOVA
followed by Bonferroni multiple comparisons post-test (****P < 0.0001).
[See online article for color version of this figure.]
3420 The Plant Cell
ubiquitinated proteins back to their unmodified forms (Smalle
and Vierstra, 2004; Kaiser and Tagwerker, 2005).
While our data show that SPR1 stabilization plays a pivotal role
in the altered MT dynamics of proteasome mutants, they also
suggest the involvement of other MAPs. For example, whereas
the increased rescue frequencies and decreased frequencies of
catastrophe (Figure 2, Table 1) that reflect an overall increase in
MT stability in rpn10-1 cells are in agreement with the predicted
effects of increased SPR1 action, the slower growth of MTs
(Table 1) cannot be explained by an increase in SPR1 activity and
suggests that loss of proteasome function also affects one or
more proteins that control the MT polymerization rate. Another
example is presented in Figure 4: The spr1-3 mutation did not
fully suppress the increased propyzamide tolerance of protea-
some mutants, suggesting the stabilization of one or more
additional proteins that promote MT stability. The involvement
of MT-stabilizing factors other then SPR1 could also explain the
observation that the right skewing of spr1-3 roots was enhanced
in the rpn10-1 spr1-3 and rpn1a-4 spr1-3 double mutants (see
Supplemental Figure 3 online). The spr1 mutants are unusual in
that they combine a decrease in MT stability with the right
skewing of roots even though this developmental phenotype is
typically the result of MT stabilization (Sedbrook and Kaloriti,
2008). Because spr1-3 partially reversed the increased MT
stability of proteasome mutants (Figure 4), we expected that
the right skewing of spr1-3 roots would also be reversed.
However, since the right skewing was enhanced in the double
mutants, we propose that this phenotype reflects the function of
other MT-stabilizing MAPs whose activity is enhanced by their
stabilization in the proteasome mutant backgrounds.
Our observation that MT stability depends on the SPR1
degradation rate suggested that the activity of this protein is
controlled posttranslationally and implied the existence of de-
velopmental or environmental cues that influence MT dynamics
by regulating SPR1 stability. Indeed, we found that SPR1 pro-
teolysis is enhanced under salt stress conditions (Figure 5) and
that SPR1 stabilization leads to salt stress hypersensitivity in 26S
proteasomemutants (Figure 6). Furthermore, we showed that the
increased salt stress sensitivity of proteasomemutants is caused
by a slower rate of MT disassembly, which is a direct result of the
SPR1 stabilization. These results are in agreement with the
results of an earlier study that described that suppression of MT
disassembly by the MT-stabilizing drug paclitaxel caused salt
stress hypersensitivity (Wang et al., 2007).
Figure 8. MG132 Stabilizes MTs and Increases the Sensitivity to Salt Stress.
(A) and (B) Four-day-old Col-0 and spr1-3 seedlings were transferred to MS/2 medium containing 4 mM propyzamide, 40 mM MG132, or 4 mM
propyzamide and 40 mM MG132. Plants were grown vertically for three days before the root tips were photographed ([A]; bar = 0.5 mm), and the root
lengths were measured (B). In (B), data represent an average root length with SD (n = 26), and the asterisks represent the significances of the differences
between the wild type and spr1-3 (****P < 0.0001; ANOVA followed by Bonferroni multiple comparisons post-test).
(C) Visualization of GFP-TUB6–labeled cortical MTs in upper hypocotyl epidermal cells. Four-day-old seedlings were pretreated with 100 mMMG132 or
DMSO in liquid MS/2 medium for 6 h, and then 20 mM propyzamide or 200 mM NaCl was added. Propyzamide treatments were done for 1 h and the
NaCl treatments for 3 h prior to microscopy. Bars = 10 mm.
(D) and (E) Four-day-old Col-0 and spr1-3 seedlings were transferred to MS/2 medium containing 100 mM NaCl, 50 mM MG132, or both. Seedlings
were photographed, and the root lengths were measured after 3 d of treatment. In (E), data represent an average root length with SD (n $ 25), and the
asterisks represent the significances of the differences between the wild type and spr1-3 (****P < 0.0001, ***P < 0.001, and **P < 0.01; ANOVA followed
by Bonferroni multiple comparisons post-test).
Proteasomal Degradation of SPR1 3421
Arabidopsis 26S proteasomemutants are also characterized by
a decrease in growth rate that reflects a reduced rate of mitosis
(Kurepa et al., 2009b). SinceMTdepolymerization is also known to
inhibit mitosis, an alternative explanation for the salt stress hyper-
sensitivity of 26S proteasome mutants is that the reduced mitotic
rates make themmore susceptible to the growth inhibitory effects
of salt stress. However, this explanation is unlikely because the
spr1-3 mutation suppressed the salt hypersensitivity but not the
reduced growth rate of proteasome mutants (Figure 6). Further-
more, the SPR1overexpression lineswere also salt hypersensitive
but did not display any decrease in growth rate (see Supplemental
Figure 7 online), thus confirming that the increased SPR1 abun-
dance in 26S proteasomemutants is indeed the most likely cause
for their salt stress hypersensitivity.
Collectively, our data reveal an important role for proteasome-
dependent regulation of SPR1 in the survival of plants challenged
by high salinity. Figure 9 outlines a model that summarizes the
role of SPR1 in the MT disassembly response to salt stress.
According to this model, SPR1 is a moderately stable protein
under normal growth conditions and is localized predominantly
at the growing ends of MTs where it inhibits their disassembly.
Upon salt stress, 26S proteasome–dependent degradation of
SPR1 is accelerated, and the MT depolymerization needed for
the survival of plant cells under salt stress is facilitated. By
contrast, salt stress–induced SPR1 degradation is attenuated in
proteasome mutants, thus slowing down MT disassembly and
causing salt stress hypersensitivity. Since the spr1-3mutant was
not more tolerant to salt stress than the wild type, we can also
conclude that this destabilization mechanism is strong and fast
enough to suppress SPR1 activity to a level where it does not
interfere with the salt-induced MT disassembly process. Ac-
cordingly, we propose that SPR1 destabilization does not initiate
the salt-induced MT disassembly, but its removal is required to
allow the timely completion of this process.
The rapid MT depolymerization response to salt stress is
thought to facilitate the formation of a newMT network that allows
Figure 9. Model Summarizing the Role of SPR1 Proteolysis in the Salt Stress Tolerance of Wild-Type and Proteasome Mutant Cells.
SPR1, a (+)-end MAP, is degraded by the 26S proteasome (26SP). In 26S proteasome mutants, the degradation rate is reduced and the MTs are more
stable due to SPR1 accumulation. Upon salt stress perception, a still unknown mechanism leads to the increased proteasome-dependent degradation
of SPR1 that facilitates MT depolymerization. In proteasome mutants, salt stress–induced degradation of SPR1 is reduced, which slows down MT
depolymerization and causes salt stress hypersensitivity. This schematic is simplified for the purpose of clarity: no other (+)-end MAPs but SPR1 are
depicted, and all (�)-end components are omitted.
3422 The Plant Cell
cells to better withstand the damaging impacts of high salt
concentrations. Indeed, in plant cells exposed to prolonged salt
stress, the initial massive MT depolymerization was followed by
the formation of newMT networks (Wang et al., 2007). It has been
established that salt stress leads to a reduction and reorientation
of cell expansion and that these growth alterations are important
for adapting to and surviving high salinity (Munns and Tester,
2008). As major determinants of the direction and rate of cell
expansion, MT networks would indeed have to be rapidly reor-
ganized to promote and facilitate such changes in growth. The
new MT network has a more random MT organization compared
with cells of unstressed plants (Wang et al., 2007). This corre-
sponds well with the need for a reduced growth rate, as rapid cell
elongation tends to require a transverse orientation of MTs to the
direction of growth (Chan et al., 2011; Crowell et al., 2011).
Because MT depolymerization is known to increase calcium
channel activity (Thion et al., 1998), the initial MT disassembly
response is also thought to be important for increasing the
cytosolic calciumconcentration,which is amajor requirement for
the adaptation to salt stress (Wang et al., 2007; Mahajan et al.,
2008). The calcium burst was also shown to be essential for the
formation of new MTs after prolonged salt stress exposure,
suggesting that the initial MT depolymerization response not only
allows the development of newMTnetworks but also establishes
optimal conditions for MT synthesis (Wang et al., 2007).
While our study highlights the importance of proteasome-
dependent proteolysis in the regulation of MT dynamics during
salt stress, it also raises a number of questions. The first question
relates to the stress-specific effects on MTs. We have shown
that osmotic stress does not cause MT disassembly and does
not promote SPR1 destabilization. Other stresses, such as cold,
heat, and treatments with nanoparticles (Smertenko et al., 1997;
S. Wang et al., 2011), induce changes in plant MT networks, and
future studies need to address whether this is also mediated via
the stability control of MAPs. Whereas SPR1 is currently the only
known 26S proteasome target among the plant MAPs, the partial
suppression of 26S proteasome mutant MT phenotypes by
spr1-3 suggests the existence of other proteins with SPR1-like
activities that are also stabilized when proteasome function is
impaired. Some obvious candidates to consider are the family of
SPR1-like proteins, which were shown to have functions similar
to SPR1 (Nakajima et al., 2006), and the evolutionarily conserved,
MT-stabilizing protein EB1, which is known to be targeted for
proteasome-dependent proteolysis in human cells (Peth et al.,
2007) and was reported to interact with SPR1 potentially to
regulate directional plant cell expansion (Kaloriti et al., 2007).
The second question relates to the mechanism by which the
perceptionof the salt stresssignal leads toproteasome-dependent
degradation of SPR1. Signal-induced site-specific phosphory-
lation often initiates the ubiquitin-dependent targeting of a pro-
tein to the 26S proteasome (Chen et al., 1995; Matsuzaki et al.,
2003; Smalle and Vierstra, 2004). Phosphorylation is also a
general regulationmechanism that reduces the binding affinity of
MAPs for MTs and thus leads to MT destabilization (Drewes
et al., 1998; Matenia and Mandelkow, 2009; Beck et al., 2010).
On the other hand, it has been reported that a mitogen-activated
protein kinase (MAPK) cascade plays a critical role in the salt
stress response of Arabidopsis (Teige et al., 2004). Therefore,
salt stress–induced proteasome-dependent control of MT de-
polymerization could involve a salt stress–activated MAPK cas-
cade that leads to the phosphorylation of SPR1, followed by its
interaction with a specific ubiquitin ligase and degradation by the
26S proteasome. This sequence of events would require that
a salt stress–responsive MAPK localizes close to SPR1 or is
relocated to SPR1 upon stress (i.e., constitutively or conditionally
associated with MTs). Recent studies in Arabidopsis identified a
number of MAPKs (MAK18 and MAK4) involved in stress signal-
ing that are associated with MTs or are involved in the regulation
of MT dynamics (Walia et al., 2009; Beck et al., 2010). On the
other hand, the SPR1 protein contains nine putative phosphor-
ylation sites (as predicted by NetPhos 2.0), and one of them (Thr-
76) is a part of MAPK consensus sequence PXS/TP or S/TP,
suggesting that the potential for MAPK-dependent SPR1 regu-
lation is indeed an interesting topic for future research.
METHODS
Plant Materials and Growth Conditions
Arabidopsis thaliana plants were grown on plates containing half-strength
Murashige and Skoog medium with 1% Suc (MS/2) as described previ-
ously (Smalle et al., 2003). Plants were grown in a controlled environment
chamber at 228C with continuous light (140 mmol photons m22 s21). The
proteasomemutants rpn1a-4, rpt2a-2, rpn10-1, and rpn12a-1 (all in Col-0
background, and all carrying the kanamycin resistance gene) have been
described (Kurepa et al., 2008; Wang et al., 2009). The spr1-3mutant and
GFP-TUA6 andGFP-TUB6 overexpression lines (all in Col-0 background)
have also been described (Nakajima et al., 2004; Abe and Hashimoto,
2005). For the generation of double mutants, putative homozygous dou-
ble mutants were selected based on their phenotypes, and their geno-
types were confirmed by immunoblotting analyses.
Treatments
Oryzalin and propyzamide were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich and
MG132 from Enzo Life Sciences. All drugs were made as 10003 stocks.
MG132, CHX, and propyzamide were dissolved in DMSO and oryzalin in
100% ethanol. All control experiments included a 13 dose of the solvent.
For all root elongation and root tip assays, plants grown on vertically
positioned MS/2 plates for 5 d were transferred to drug- or mock-
supplemented media. Test plates were positioned vertically, and the root
length was marked daily. After 3 d of treatments, plants were photo-
graphed. Photomicrographs of representative root tips were taken with
anOlympus SZX12microscope equippedwith aDP12 camera. For stress
tolerance assays, 4- or 5-d-old seedlings were transferred to test plates
with NaCl or mannitol and were grown vertically. For all morphometric
analyses, the relevant parameter wasmeasured fromdigital images using
ImageJ (http://rsb.info.nih.gov/ij/). Unless specified otherwise, data are
presented as mean values, and the error bars represent standard devi-
ation. Statistical significance was determined by ANOVA tests followed
by post hoc Bonferroni multiple comparison test. Post hoc statistical
significance is indicated in the figures by asterisks or crosses. For all
experiments, descriptive statistics, plotting, and the hypothesis testing
were done using Prism 5.0d software (GraphPad Software).
Confocal Microscopy Analysis of MTs and Scoring
MT distributions were analyzed in 35S:GFP-TUA6 and 35S:GFP-TUB6
lines in Col-0, rpn10-1, and rpn10-1 spr1-3 backgrounds using an
Proteasomal Degradation of SPR1 3423
Olympus Fluoview FV1000 confocal laser scanningmicroscope equipped
with an argon ion laser for the excitation of GFP (excitation 488 nm and
barrier 500 to 550 nm) essentially as described (S. Wang et al., 2011). For
all experiments, 4-d-old seedlings were used, and epidermal cells of
upper hypocotyl regions were analyzed. Except for the MT dynamics
measurements, seedlings were mounted, incubated, and observed in
water or an aqueous solution of the tested drugs. For themeasurement of
individual MT dynamics, seedlings were mounted in liquid MS/2 medium,
and time-lapse imaging was performed at 1% laser power and 4-s in-
tervals for 3 to 6 min. Images were processed and analyzed using ImageJ
as previously described (Buschmann and Lloyd, 2008). The dynamics and
the frequency of catastrophe and rescue were calculated as described
(Dhonukshe and Gadella, 2003; Abe and Hashimoto, 2005). To quantify
MT network density, MTs crossing the middle long axis of upper hypo-
cotyl cells were counted. The results were expressed as MT number per
unit distance as described previously (Ishida et al., 2007).
Immunoblotting Analyses
For all analyses, plants were weighed and transferred to 1.7-mL tubes for
treatment. After treatment, plants were blotted, frozen in liquid N2, and
ground in three volumes of 23 Laemmli sample buffer. Total proteins
were separated by SDS-PAGE (14% acrylamide separating gel for SPR1
analyses, 8% for RPN1 analyses, and 10% for all other analyses).
Proteins were transferred to nitrocellulose membranes (Hybond C-Extra;
GE) and probed as previously described (S.Wang et al., 2011). Antibodies
against RPN1 and SPR1 were described (Nakajima et al., 2004; Wang
et al., 2009). To test if the signal intensity for SPR1 in all experiments falls
within the linear dynamic range of the assay, immunoblots with a dilution
series of total protein extracts were probed with anti-SPR1 (dilution
1:1000), developed using chemiluminescent substrate (Thermo Scientific
Pierce ECL Plus substrate) and analyzed using the linear best fit analyses
(see Supplemental Figure 8 online). The anti-RPN10 sera were obtained
from Enzo Life Sciences. The anti-glutamine synthase (GS) serum was
purchased from Agrisera AB. GS was assayed as a control. This is a
stable protein, and its steady state levels are not affected by inhibition
of proteasome activity (Kurepa et al., 2010). Horseradish peroxidase–
conjugated and alkaline phosphatase–conjugated secondary antibodies
were purchased from Santa Cruz Biotechnology.
Transcript Analyses
Total RNA was isolated using TRIzol reagent (Invitrogen). RNA was
treated with TURBO DNase (Ambion), and the RNA concentrations were
determined spectrophotometricaly (NanoDrop 2000; Thermo Scientific).
Onemicrogram of RNA per sample was used for the synthesis of the first-
strand cDNA (iScript reverse transcription supermix; Bio-Rad).
For the quantification of SPR1 transcripts, real-time RT-PCR was
performed using the StepOne real-time PCR system (Applied Biosys-
tems) and the DyNAmo Flash SYBR Green qPCR kit (Finnzymes) in total
reaction volume of 20 mL. The SPR1 primers used were 59-AGCCTGCA-
GAGCTTAACAAG-39 and 59-TGAACTTTGGTCGAAGGACG-39, and the
primers for reference genes ACT2, ACT8, EF-1a, and GADPH were as
described (Czechowski et al., 2005). Selection of the reference gene(s)
best for the normalization in each experiment was calculated using
geNorm (Vandesompele et al., 2002).
Analyses of Ubiquitin Conjugates and Proteasome Activity
Immunoblotting analysis of ubiquitin conjugates was done as described
(Kurepa et al., 2008). The antipolyubiquitinated protein serum was from
Enzo Life Sciences. For proteasome activity assays, samples were
ground in 1.25 volumes of extraction buffer as described (Kurepa et al.,
2008). Protein concentrations were measured using Bradford reagent
(Bio-Rad), and total proteasome activity was measured using the Suc-
LLVY-AMC assay as described (Kurepa et al., 2008).
Generation of Transgenic Plants Overexpressing SPR1
To generate the overexpression construct, SPR1 cDNA was amplified
using attB PCR primers attB1SPR1 59-GGGGACAAGTTTGTACAAAAA-
AGCAGGCTTAATGGGTCGTGGAAACAGC-39 and attB2SPR1 59-GGG-
GACCACTTTGTACAAGAAAGCTGGGTCTTACTTGCCACCAGTGAAGA-39.
The cDNA was introduced into pDONR221 via BP reaction and then to
pEarlyGate100 (Earley et al., 2006) by LR recombinase (Invitrogen).
Transgenic plants were selected on MS/2 plates containing 10 mM
L-phosphinothricin (Gold Biotechology), and homozygous T3 plants were
used for the analyses.
Accession Numbers
Sequence data from this article can be found in The Arabidopsis
Information Resource (http://www.Arabidopsis.org/) under the following
accession numbers: RPN1a (At2g20580), RPT2a (At4g29040), RPN10
(At4g38630), RPN12a (At1g64520), SPR1 (At2g03680), TUA6 (At4g14960),
and TUB6 (At5g12250). Arabidopsis T-DNA insertion mutants and trans-
genic lines and their identification numbers are SALK_027970 (rpn1a-4),
SALK_005596 (rpt2a-2), 35S:GFP-TUA6 (CS6551), and 35S:GFP-TUB6
(CS6550).
Supplemental Data
The following materials are available in the online version of this article.
Supplemental Figure 1. Visible Phenotypes and Propyzamide Re-
sponses of the Double Mutant rpn1a-4 rpn10-1.
Supplemental Figure 2. The Steady State SPR1 Transcript Levels in
Proteasome Mutants Are the Same as in the Wild Type.
Supplemental Figure 3. Right-Handed Helical Growth Is Enhanced in
rpn1a-4 spr1-3 and rpn10-1 spr1-3 Mutants.
Supplemental Figure 4. Propyzamide Treatment Reverts Amplified
Root Skewing in the rpn1a-4 spr1-3 Mutant.
Supplemental Figure 5. Effects of NaCl Treatments on the SPR1
Transcript Level, SPR1 Protein Abundance, Accumulation of Ubiq-
uitinated Proteins, and Proteasome Activity.
Supplemental Figure 6. Treatment with 10 mM Propyzamide Causes
Depolymerization of Cortical MTs.
Supplemental Figure 7. Overexpression of SPR1 Increases MT
Stability and Leads to Salt Stress Hypersensitivity.
Supplemental Figure 8. Linear Relationship between SPR1 Abun-
dance and Signal Intensity on Immunoblots Developed Using Chemi-
luminescent Substrate.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was supported in part by the Kentucky Science and Engi-
neering Foundation (Grant 148-502-06-189) and the Kentucky Tobacco
Research and Development Center. We thank the ABRC for providing
seeds of the GFP-TUA6 and GFP-TUB6 transgenic lines.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
The research was designed by S.W. under guidance from J.A.S. The
research was performed by S.W. with assistance from J.K. and J.A.S.
3424 The Plant Cell
New analytical tools were contributed by T.H. The data were analyzed
and the article was written by S.W., J.K., and J.A.S.
Received August 1, 2011; revised August 30, 2011; accepted September
12, 2011; published September 27, 2011.
REFERENCES
Abdrakhamanova, A., Wang, Q.Y., Khokhlova, L., and Nick, P.
(2003). Is microtubule disassembly a trigger for cold acclimation?
Plant Cell Physiol. 44: 676–686.
Abe, T., and Hashimoto, T. (2005). Altered microtubule dynamics by
expression of modified a-tubulin protein causes right-handed helical
growth in transgenic Arabidopsis plants. Plant J. 43: 191–204.
Ambrose, J.C., Shoji, T., Kotzer, A.M., Pighin, J.A., and Wasteneys,
G.O. (2007). The Arabidopsis CLASP gene encodes a microtubule-
associated protein involved in cell expansion and division. Plant Cell
19: 2763–2775.
Ban, R., Matsuzaki, H., Akashi, T., Sakashita, G., Taniguchi, H., Park,
S.Y., Tanaka, H., Furukawa, K., and Urano, T. (2009). Mitotic
regulation of the stability of microtubule plus-end tracking protein
EB3 by ubiquitin ligase SIAH-1 and Aurora mitotic kinases. J. Biol.
Chem. 284: 28367–28381.
Bartolini, F., Tian, G., Piehl, M., Cassimeris, L., Lewis, S.A., and
Cowan, N.J. (2005). Identification of a novel tubulin-destabilizing pro-
tein related to the chaperone cofactor E. J. Cell Sci. 118: 1197–1207.
Baskin, T.I., Wilson, J.E., Cork, A., and Williamson, R.E. (1994).
Morphology and microtubule organization in Arabidopsis roots ex-
posed to oryzalin or taxol. Plant Cell Physiol. 35: 935–942.
Beck, M., Komis, G., Muller, J., Menzel, D., and Samaj, J. (2010).
Arabidopsis homologs of nucleus- and phragmoplast-localized kinase
2 and 3 and mitogen-activated protein kinase 4 are essential for
microtubule organization. Plant Cell 22: 755–771.
Bhamidipati, A., Lewis, S.A., and Cowan, N.J. (2000). ADP ribosyla-
tion factor-like protein 2 (Arl2) regulates the interaction of tubulin-
folding cofactor D with native tubulin. J. Cell Biol. 149: 1087–1096.
Bisgrove, S.R., Hable, W.E., and Kropf, D.L. (2004). +TIPs and
microtubule regulation. The beginning of the plus end in plants. Plant
Physiol. 136: 3855–3863.
Bisgrove, S.R., Lee, Y.R., Liu, B., Peters, N.T., and Kropf, D.L. (2008).
The microtubule plus-end binding protein EB1 functions in root
responses to touch and gravity signals in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 20:
396–410.
Blancaflor, E.B., and Hasenstein, K.H. (1995). Growth and microtubule
orientation of Zea mays roots subjected to osmotic stress. Int. J. Plant
Sci. 156: 774–783.
Burssens, S., Himanen, K., van de Cotte, B., Beeckman, T., Van
Montagu, M., Inze, D., and Verbruggen, N. (2000). Expression of cell
cycle regulatory genes and morphological alterations in response to
salt stress in Arabidopsis thaliana. Planta 211: 632–640.
Buschmann, H., and Lloyd, C.W. (2008). Arabidopsis mutants and the
network of microtubule-associated functions. Mol. Plant 1: 888–898.
Chan, J., Calder, G.M., Doonan, J.H., and Lloyd, C.W. (2003). EB1
reveals mobile microtubule nucleation sites in Arabidopsis. Nat. Cell
Biol. 5: 967–971.
Chan, J., Eder, M., Crowell, E.F., Hampson, J., Calder, G., and Lloyd,
C. (2011). Microtubules and CESA tracks at the inner epidermal wall
align independently of those on the outer wall of light-grown Arabi-
dopsis hypocotyls. J. Cell Sci. 124: 1088–1094.
Chen, Z., Hagler, J., Palombella, V.J., Melandri, F., Scherer, D.,
Ballard, D., and Maniatis, T. (1995). Signal-induced site-specific
phosphorylation targets I kappa B alpha to the ubiquitin-proteasome
pathway. Genes Dev. 9: 1586–1597.
Crowell, E.F., Timpano, H., Desprez, T., Franssen-Verheijen, T.,
Emons, A.M., Hofte, H., and Vernhettes, S. (2011). Differential regu-
lation of cellulose orientation at the inner and outer face of epidermal
cells in the Arabidopsis hypocotyl. Plant Cell 23: 2592–2605.
Czechowski, T., Stitt, M., Altmann, T., Udvardi, M.K., and Scheible,
W.R. (2005). Genome-wide identification and testing of superior
reference genes for transcript normalization in Arabidopsis. Plant
Physiol. 139: 5–17.
David, D.C., Layfield, R., Serpell, L., Narain, Y., Goedert, M., and
Spillantini, M.G. (2002). Proteasomal degradation of tau protein. J.
Neurochem. 83: 176–185.
Dhonukshe, P., and Gadella, T.W., Jr. (2003). Alteration of microtubule
dynamic instability during preprophase band formation revealed by
yellow fluorescent protein-CLIP170 microtubule plus-end labeling.
Plant Cell 15: 597–611.
Dhonukshe, P., Laxalt, A.M., Goedhart, J., Gadella, T.W., and
Munnik, T. (2003). Phospholipase d activation correlates with micro-
tubule reorganization in living plant cells. Plant Cell 15: 2666–2679.
Dill, A., Jung, H.S., and Sun, T.P. (2001). The DELLA motif is essential
for gibberellin-induced degradation of RGA. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
USA 98: 14162–14167.
Drewes, G., Ebneth, A., and Mandelkow, E.M. (1998). MAPs, MARKs
and microtubule dynamics. Trends Biochem. Sci. 23: 307–311.
Earley, K.W., Haag, J.R., Pontes, O., Opper, K., Juehne, T., Song, K.,
and Pikaard, C.S. (2006). Gateway-compatible vectors for plant
functional genomics and proteomics. Plant J. 45: 616–629.
Furutani, I., Watanabe, Y., Prieto, R., Masukawa, M., Suzuki, K.,
Naoi, K., Thitamadee, S., Shikanai, T., and Hashimoto, T. (2000).
The SPIRAL genes are required for directional control of cell elonga-
tion in Arabidopsis thaliana. Development 127: 4443–4453.
Gagne, J.M., Smalle, J., Gingerich, D.J., Walker, J.M., Yoo, S.D.,
Yanagisawa, S., and Vierstra, R.D. (2004). Arabidopsis EIN3-binding
F-box 1 and 2 form ubiquitin-protein ligases that repress ethylene
action and promote growth by directing EIN3 degradation. Proc. Natl.
Acad. Sci. USA 101: 6803–6808.
Galjart, N. (2005). CLIPs and CLASPs and cellular dynamics. Nat. Rev.
Mol. Cell Biol. 6: 487–498.
Glickman, M.H. (2000). Getting in and out of the proteasome. Semin.
Cell Dev. Biol. 11: 149–158.
Hamada, T. (2007). Microtubule-associated proteins in higher plants.
J. Plant Res. 120: 79–98.
Hamant, O., Heisler, M.G., Jonsson, H., Krupinski, P., Uyttewaal, M.,
Bokov, P., Corson, F., Sahlin, P., Boudaoud, A., Meyerowitz, E.M.,
Couder, Y., and Traas, J. (2008). Developmental patterning by
mechanical signals in Arabidopsis. Science 322: 1650–1655.
Hershko, A., and Ciechanover, A. (1998). The ubiquitin system. Annu.
Rev. Biochem. 67: 425–479.
Himmelspach, R., Wymer, C.L., Lloyd, C.W., and Nick, P. (1999).
Gravity-induced reorientation of cortical microtubules observed in
vivo. Plant J. 18: 449–453.
Hirokawa, N. (1994). Microtubule organization and dynamics dependent
on microtubule-associated proteins. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 6: 74–81.
Ishida, T., Kaneko, Y., Iwano, M., and Hashimoto, T. (2007). Helical
microtubule arrays in a collection of twisting tubulin mutants of
Arabidopsis thaliana. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 104: 8544–8549.
Kaloriti, K., Galva, C., Parupalli, C., Khalifa, N., Galvin, M., and
Sedbrook, J.C. (2007). Microtubule associated proteins in plants and
the processes They manage. J. Integr. Plant Biol. 48: 1164–1173.
Kaiser, P., and Tagwerker, C. (2005). Is this protein ubiquitinated?
Methods Enzymol. 399: 243–248.
Kirik, V., Herrmann, U., Parupalli, C., Sedbrook, J.C., Ehrhardt, D.W.,
Proteasomal Degradation of SPR1 3425
and Hulskamp, M. (2007). CLASP localizes in two discrete patterns
on cortical microtubules and is required for cell morphogenesis and
cell division in Arabidopsis. J. Cell Sci. 120: 4416–4425.
Komaki, S., Abe, T., Coutuer, S., Inze, D., Russinova, E., and
Hashimoto, T. (2010). Nuclear-localized subtype of end-binding
1 protein regulates spindle organization in Arabidopsis. J. Cell Sci.
123: 451–459.
Kurepa, J., Karangwa, C., Duke, L.S., and Smalle, J.A. (2010).
Arabidopsis sensitivity to protein synthesis inhibitors depends on
26S proteasome activity. Plant Cell Rep. 29: 249–259.
Kurepa, J., and Smalle, J.A. (2008). Structure, function and regulation
of plant proteasomes. Biochimie 90: 324–335.
Kurepa, J., Toh-E, A., and Smalle, J.A. (2008). 26S proteasome
regulatory particle mutants have increased oxidative stress tolerance.
Plant J. 53: 102–114.
Kurepa, J., Wang, S., Li, Y., and Smalle, J. (2009a). Proteasome
regulation, plant growth and stress tolerance. Plant Signal. Behav. 4:
924–927.
Kurepa, J., Wang, S., Li, Y., Zaitlin, D., Pierce, A.J., and Smalle, J.A.
(2009b). Loss of 26S proteasome function leads to increased cell size
and decreased cell number in Arabidopsis shoot organs. Plant
Physiol. 150: 178–189.
Lee, D.H., and Goldberg, A.L. (1998). Proteasome inhibitors: Valuable
new tools for cell biologists. Trends Cell Biol. 8: 397–403.
Lloyd, C., and Hussey, P. (2001). Microtubule-associated proteins in
plants—Why we need a MAP. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2: 40–47.
Lopez-Molina, L., Mongrand, S., and Chua, N.H. (2001). A postgermi-
nation developmental arrest checkpoint is mediated by abscisic acid
and requires the ABI5 transcription factor in Arabidopsis. Proc. Natl.
Acad. Sci. USA 98: 4782–4787.
Lyle, K., Kumar, P., and Wittmann, T. (2009a). SnapShot: Microtubule
regulators I. Cell 136: 380.
Lyle, K., Kumar, P., and Wittmann, T. (2009b). SnapShot: Microtubule
regulators II. Cell 136: 566.
Lyons-Abbott, S., Sackett, D.L., Wloga, D., Gaertig, J., Morgan, R.E.,
Werbovetz, K.A., and Morrissette, N.S. (2010). a-Tubulin mutations
alter oryzalin affinity and microtubule assembly properties to confer
dinitroaniline resistance. Eukaryot. Cell 9: 1825–1834.
Mahajan, S., Pandey, G.K., and Tuteja, N. (2008). Calcium- and salt-
stress signaling in plants: shedding light on SOS pathway. Arch.
Biochem. Biophys. 471: 146–158.
Mandelkow, E., and Mandelkow, E.M. (1995). Microtubules and
microtubule-associated proteins. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 7: 72–81.
Matenia, D., and Mandelkow, E.M. (2009). The tau of MARK: A
polarized view of the cytoskeleton. Trends Biochem. Sci. 34: 332–342.
Mathur, J., and Chua, N.H. (2000). Microtubule stabilization leads to
growth reorientation in Arabidopsis trichomes. Plant Cell 12: 465–477.
Mathur, J., Mathur, N., Kernebeck, B., Srinivas, B.P., and Hulskamp,
M. (2003). A novel localization pattern for an EB1-like protein links
microtubule dynamics to endomembrane organization. Curr. Biol. 13:
1991–1997.
Matsuzaki, H., Daitoku, H., Hatta, M., Tanaka, K., and Fukamizu, A.
(2003). Insulin-induced phosphorylation of FKHR (Foxo1) targets to
proteasomal degradation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100: 11285–11290.
Munns, R., and Tester, M. (2008). Mechanisms of salinity tolerance.
Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 59: 651–681.
Nakajima, K., Furutani, I., Tachimoto, H., Matsubara, H., and
Hashimoto, T. (2004). SPIRAL1 encodes a plant-specific microtubule-
localized protein required for directional control of rapidly expanding
Arabidopsis cells. Plant Cell 16: 1178–1190.
Nakajima, K., Kawamura, T., and Hashimoto, T. (2006). Role of the
SPIRAL1 gene family in anisotropic growth of Arabidopsis thaliana.
Plant Cell Physiol. 47: 513–522.
Nakamura, M., Naoi, K., Shoji, T., and Hashimoto, T. (2004). Low
concentrations of propyzamide and oryzalin alter microtubule dynam-
ics in Arabidopsis epidermal cells. Plant Cell Physiol. 45: 1330–1334.
Nogales, E. (2001). Structural insight into microtubule function. Annu.
Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 30: 397–420.
Oka, M., Yanagawa, Y., Asada, T., Yoneda, A., Hasezawa, S., Sato,
T., and Nakagawa, H. (2004). Inhibition of proteasome by MG-132
treatment causes extra phragmoplast formation and cortical micro-
tubule disorganization during M/G1 transition in synchronized to-
bacco cells. Plant Cell Physiol. 45: 1623–1632.
Peth, A., Boettcher, J.P., and Dubiel, W. (2007). Ubiquitin-dependent
proteolysis of the microtubule end-binding protein 1, EB1, is con-
trolled by the COP9 signalosome: Possible consequences for micro-
tubule filament stability. J. Mol. Biol. 368: 550–563.
Petrucelli, L., et al. (2004). CHIP and Hsp70 regulate tau ubiquitination,
degradation and aggregation. Hum. Mol. Genet. 13: 703–714.
Poruchynsky, M.S., Sackett, D.L., Robey, R.W., Ward, Y., Annunziata,
C., and Fojo, T. (2008). Proteasome inhibitors increase tubulin poly-
merization and stabilization in tissue culture cells: A possible mech-
anism contributing to peripheral neuropathy and cellular toxicity
following proteasome inhibition. Cell Cycle 7: 940–949.
Ren, Y., Zhao, J., and Feng, J. (2003). Parkin binds to a/b tubulin and
increases their ubiquitination and degradation. J. Neurosci. 23: 3316–
3324.
Schuyler, S.C., and Pellman, D. (2001). Microtubule “plus-end-tracking
proteins”: The end is just the beginning. Cell 105: 421–424.
Sedbrook, J.C. (2004). MAPs in plant cells: Delineating microtubule
growth dynamics and organization. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 7: 632–640.
Sedbrook, J.C., Ehrhardt, D.W., Fisher, S.E., Scheible, W.R., and
Somerville, C.R. (2004). The Arabidopsis sku6/spiral1 gene encodes
a plus end-localized microtubule-interacting protein involved in direc-
tional cell expansion. Plant Cell 16: 1506–1520.
Sedbrook, J.C., and Kaloriti, D. (2008). Microtubules, MAPs and plant
directional cell expansion. Trends Plant Sci. 13: 303–310.
Sheng, X., Hu, Z., Lu, H., Wang, X., Baluska, F., Samaj, J., and Lin, J.
(2006). Roles of the ubiquitin/proteasome pathway in pollen tube
growth with emphasis on MG132-induced alterations in ultrastructure,
cytoskeleton, and cell wall components. Plant Physiol. 141: 1578–
1590.
Shoji, T., Suzuki, K., Abe, T., Kaneko, Y., Shi, H., Zhu, J.K., Rus, A.,
Hasegawa, P.M., and Hashimoto, T. (2006). Salt stress affects
cortical microtubule organization and helical growth in Arabidopsis.
Plant Cell Physiol. 47: 1158–1168.
Smalle, J., Kurepa, J., Yang, P., Emborg, T.J., Babiychuk, E.,
Kushnir, S., and Vierstra, R.D. (2003). The pleiotropic role of the
26S proteasome subunit RPN10 in Arabidopsis growth and develop-
ment supports a substrate-specific function in abscisic acid signaling.
Plant Cell 15: 965–980.
Smalle, J., and Vierstra, R.D. (2004). The ubiquitin 26S proteasome
proteolytic pathway. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 55: 555–590.
Smertenko, A., Draber, P., Viklicky, V., and Opatrny, Z. (1997). Heat
stress affects the organization of microtubules and cell division in
Nicotiana tabacum cells. Plant Cell Environ. 20: 1534–1542.
Teige, M., Scheikl, E., Eulgem, T., Doczi, R., Ichimura, K., Shinozaki,
K., Dangl, J.L., and Hirt, H. (2004). The MKK2 pathway mediates
cold and salt stress signaling in Arabidopsis. Mol. Cell 15: 141–152.
Thion, L., Mazars, C., Nacry, P., Bouchez, D., Moreau, M., Ranjeva, R.,
and Thuleau, P. (1998). Plasma membrane depolarization-activated
calcium channels, stimulated by microtubule-depolymerizing drugs in
wild-type Arabidopsis thaliana protoplasts, display constitutively large
activities and a longer half-life in ton 2 mutant cells affected in the
organization of cortical microtubules. Plant J. 13: 603–610.
Ueda, K., Matsuyama, T., and Hashimoto, T. (1999). Visualization of
3426 The Plant Cell
microtubules in living cells of transgenic Arabidopsis thaliana. Proto-
plasma 206: 201–206.
Van Bruaene, N., Joss, G., and Van Oostveldt, P. (2004). Reorgani-
zation and in vivo dynamics of microtubules during Arabidopsis root
hair development. Plant Physiol. 136: 3905–3919.
Vandesompele, J., De Preter, K., Pattyn, F., Poppe, B., Van Roy, N.,
De Paepe, A., and Speleman, F. (2002). Accurate normalization of
real-time quantitative RT-PCR data by geometric averaging of multi-
ple internal control genes. Genome Biol. 3: RESEARCH0034.
Vaughan, K.T. (2005). TIP maker and TIP marker; EB1 as a master
controller of microtubule plus ends. J. Cell Biol. 171: 197–200.
Vierstra, R.D. (2009). The ubiquitin-26S proteasome system at the
nexus of plant biology. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 10: 385–397.
Voloshin, O., Gocheva, Y., Gutnick, M., Movshovich, N., Bakhrat, A.,
Baranes-Bachar, K., Bar-Zvi, D., Parvari, R., Gheber, L., and
Raveh, D. (2010). Tubulin chaperone E binds microtubules and
proteasomes and protects against misfolded protein stress. Cell.
Mol. Life Sci. 67: 2025–2038.
Walia, A., Lee, J.S., Wasteneys, G., and Ellis, B. (2009). Arabidopsis
mitogen-activated protein kinase MPK18 mediates cortical microtu-
bule functions in plant cells. Plant J. 59: 565–575.
Wang, C., Li, J., and Yuan, M. (2007). Salt tolerance requires cortical
microtubule reorganization in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell Physiol. 48:
1534–1547.
Wang, C., Zhang, L.-J., and Huang, R.-D. (2011). Cytoskeleton and
plant salt stress tolerance. Plant Signal. Behav. 6: 29–31.
Wang, Q.Y., and Nick, P. (2001). Cold acclimation can induce micro-
tubular cold stability in a manner distinct from abscisic acid. Plant Cell
Physiol. 42: 999–1005.
Wang, S., Kurepa, J., and Smalle, J.A. (2009). The Arabidopsis 26S
proteasome subunit RPN1a is required for optimal plant growth and
stress responses. Plant Cell Physiol. 50: 1721–1725.
Wang, S., Kurepa, J., and Smalle, J.A. (2011). Ultra-small TiO(2)
nanoparticles disrupt microtubular networks in Arabidopsis thaliana.
Plant Cell Environ. 34: 811–820.
Xie, Q., Guo, H.S., Dallman, G., Fang, S., Weissman, A.M., and Chua,
N.H. (2002). SINAT5 promotes ubiquitin-related degradation of NAC1
to attenuate auxin signals. Nature 419: 167–170.
Yanagawa, Y., et al. (2002). Cell-cycle dependent dynamic change of
26S proteasome distribution in tobacco BY-2 cells. Plant Cell Physiol.
43: 604–613.
Yewdell, J.W., Lacsina, J.R., Rechsteiner, M.C., and Nicchitta, C.V.
(2011). Out with the old, in with the new? Comparing methods for
measuring protein degradation. Cell Biol. Int. 35: 457–462.
Zhu, J.K. (2001). Plant salt tolerance. Trends Plant Sci. 6: 66–71.
Proteasomal Degradation of SPR1 3427
DOI 10.1105/tpc.111.089920; originally published online September 27, 2011; 2011;23;3412-3427Plant Cell
Songhu Wang, Jasmina Kurepa, Takashi Hashimoto and Jan A. SmalleDependent Degradation of SPIRAL1−Proteasome
Cortical Microtubule Arrays Involves 26S ArabidopsisInduced Disassembly of −Salt Stress
This information is current as of February 26, 2020
Supplemental Data /content/suppl/2011/09/15/tpc.111.089920.DC1.html
References /content/23/9/3412.full.html#ref-list-1
This article cites 91 articles, 32 of which can be accessed free at:
Permissions https://www.copyright.com/ccc/openurl.do?sid=pd_hw1532298X&issn=1532298X&WT.mc_id=pd_hw1532298X
eTOCs http://www.plantcell.org/cgi/alerts/ctmain
Sign up for eTOCs at:
CiteTrack Alerts http://www.plantcell.org/cgi/alerts/ctmain
Sign up for CiteTrack Alerts at:
Subscription Information http://www.aspb.org/publications/subscriptions.cfm
is available at:Plant Physiology and The Plant CellSubscription Information for
ADVANCING THE SCIENCE OF PLANT BIOLOGY © American Society of Plant Biologists
Top Related