1 / 30

Overall Hypothesis

Overall Hypothesis. IF N-glycans on PRRs are the first to recognize invading pathogens, THEN mutations in genes that encode for N-glycosylation enzymes will cause a decreased or non-existent immune response. Results: Figure 1. Figure 1A & 1B Hypothesis:

louisa
Download Presentation

Overall Hypothesis

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Overall Hypothesis IF N-glycans on PRRs are the first to recognize invading pathogens, THEN mutations in genes that encode for N-glycosylation enzymes will cause a decreased or non-existent immune response.

  2. Results: Figure 1 • Figure 1A & 1B Hypothesis: IF N-glycans recognize invading pathogens and stimulate a seedling growth arrest immune response, THEN mutations in genes that encode for N-glycosylation enzymes will leave growth unaffected.

  3. Figure 1 Background • Method: • tDNA insertion mutants • 100nM elf18 or flg22 treatment GOI ARM Ti Plasmid Agrobacterium GOI - Gene of Interest ARM - Antibiotic Resistance Marker

  4. Figure 1A Out of ALL mutants, only stt3a-2 was strongly insensitive to MAMP treatment

  5. Results: Figure 1 • Hypothesis Supplemental Figure 2 IF N-glycans recognize invading pathogens and stimulate an “oxidative burst” immune response, THEN mutations in genes that encode for N-glycosylation enzymes will decrease the “oxidative burst” immune response.

  6. Results: Supplemental Figure 2

  7. Figure 1B Background • Method: • Col-O and mutants treated with 0.5x108cfu/ml of Pseudomonas psyringaepv. tomato DC3000 bacteria. • Hypothesis Figure 1B IF an immune response decreases bacterial viability, THEN mutations in N-glycosylation that decrease immune response will have no effect on bacterial viability.

  8. Figure 1B • Mutants showed to be more susceptible to bacteria

  9. Figure 2 Background • Method: • Cross-linking • SDS-PAGE • Hypothesis Figure 2A: IF peptide shape is essential to pathogen recognition, THEN cross-linked peptides will result in a loss of function for N-glycosylation mutants.

  10. Cross-linking • Radioactivity-labeled elf26 and flg22 peptides(MAMP variants) • in vitro • Bind to receptors EFR and FLS2 • If receptor is still present we will see a band at 150kDa (EFR) or 175kDa (FLS2) • Shows ligand binding and response

  11. SDS-Page • Separates proteins according to their size

  12. Figure 2A

  13. Results: Figure 2 • Hypothesis Figure 2B IF N-glycosylation is responsible for protein folding, then mutation in the N-glycosylation pathway will result in decreased PRR accumulation.

  14. Figure 2B

  15. Results: Figure 2 • Localization of PRRs in selected N-glycosylation mutants IF EFR and FLS2 are truly membrane-bound proteins, THEN a fluorescent tag on these PRRs will result in localization at the plasma membrane.

  16. Confocal Microscopy http://www.olympusfluoview.com/theory/index.html

  17. Figure 2C

  18. Supplemental Figure 5A & B

  19. Results: Figure 3 • Hypothesis for Figure 3 IF tunicamycin causes N-glycan degradation, THEN a gel will reveal band shift proportional to N-glycans present on wildtype PRRs.

  20. Figure 3A

  21. Figure 3B

  22. Figure 3C

  23. Figure 3D

  24. Results Figure 4 • Hypothesis for Figure 4A IF EFR function is solely based on N-Glycosylation, THEN point mutations to elimate N-Glycosylation motifs will result in EFR dysfunction.

  25. EFR

  26. Figure 4A

  27. Figure 4B

  28. Figure 4C

More Related