Article9 August 2007free access LysM domains mediate lipochitin–oligosaccharide recognition and Nfr genes extend the symbiotic host range Simona Radutoiu Simona Radutoiu Laboratory of Gene Expression, Department of Molecular Biology, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark Search for more papers by this author Lene H Madsen Lene H Madsen Laboratory of Gene Expression, Department of Molecular Biology, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark Search for more papers by this author Esben B Madsen Esben B Madsen Laboratory of Gene Expression, Department of Molecular Biology, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark Search for more papers by this author Anna Jurkiewicz Anna Jurkiewicz Laboratory of Gene Expression, Department of Molecular Biology, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark Search for more papers by this author Eigo Fukai Eigo Fukai Laboratory of Gene Expression, Department of Molecular Biology, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, DenmarkPresent address: Plant Functional Genomics Laboratory, National Institute of Agrobiological Sciences, 2-1-2 Kannondai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8602, Japan Search for more papers by this author Esben MH Quistgaard Esben MH Quistgaard Laboratory of Gene Expression, Department of Molecular Biology, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark Search for more papers by this author Anita S Albrektsen Anita S Albrektsen Laboratory of Gene Expression, Department of Molecular Biology, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark Search for more papers by this author Euan K James Euan K James School of Life Sciences, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK Search for more papers by this author Søren Thirup Søren Thirup Laboratory of Gene Expression, Department of Molecular Biology, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark Search for more papers by this author Jens Stougaard Corresponding Author Jens Stougaard Laboratory of Gene Expression, Department of Molecular Biology, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark Search for more papers by this author Simona Radutoiu Simona Radutoiu Laboratory of Gene Expression, Department of Molecular Biology, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark Search for more papers by this author Lene H Madsen Lene H Madsen Laboratory of Gene Expression, Department of Molecular Biology, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark Search for more papers by this author Esben B Madsen Esben B Madsen Laboratory of Gene Expression, Department of Molecular Biology, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark Search for more papers by this author Anna Jurkiewicz Anna Jurkiewicz Laboratory of Gene Expression, Department of Molecular Biology, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark Search for more papers by this author Eigo Fukai Eigo Fukai Laboratory of Gene Expression, Department of Molecular Biology, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, DenmarkPresent address: Plant Functional Genomics Laboratory, National Institute of Agrobiological Sciences, 2-1-2 Kannondai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8602, Japan Search for more papers by this author Esben MH Quistgaard Esben MH Quistgaard Laboratory of Gene Expression, Department of Molecular Biology, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark Search for more papers by this author Anita S Albrektsen Anita S Albrektsen Laboratory of Gene Expression, Department of Molecular Biology, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark Search for more papers by this author Euan K James Euan K James School of Life Sciences, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK Search for more papers by this author Søren Thirup Søren Thirup Laboratory of Gene Expression, Department of Molecular Biology, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark Search for more papers by this author Jens Stougaard Corresponding Author Jens Stougaard Laboratory of Gene Expression, Department of Molecular Biology, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark Search for more papers by this author Author Information Simona Radutoiu1,‡, Lene H Madsen1,‡, Esben B Madsen1, Anna Jurkiewicz1, Eigo Fukai1, Esben MH Quistgaard1, Anita S Albrektsen1, Euan K James2, Søren Thirup1 and Jens Stougaard 1 1Laboratory of Gene Expression, Department of Molecular Biology, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark 2School of Life Sciences, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK ‡These authors contributed equally to this work *Corresponding author. Laboratory of Gene Expression, Department of Molecular Biology, University of Aarhus, Gustav Wieds Vej 10, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark. Tel.: +45 89 42 50 11; Fax: +45 86 20 12 22; E-mail: [email protected] The EMBO Journal (2007)26:3923-3935https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.emboj.7601826 PDFDownload PDF of article text and main figures. ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyWechatReddit Figures & Info Legume–Rhizobium symbiosis is an example of selective cell recognition controlled by host/non-host determinants. Individual bacterial strains have a distinct host range enabling nodulation of a limited set of legume species and vice versa. We show here that expression of Lotus japonicus Nfr1 and Nfr5 Nod-factor receptor genes in Medicago truncatula and L. filicaulis, extends their host range to include bacterial strains, Mesorhizobium loti or DZL, normally infecting L. japonicus. As a result, the symbiotic program is induced, nodules develop and infection threads are formed. Using L. japonicus mutants and domain swaps between L. japonicus and L. filicaulis NFR1 and NFR5, we further demonstrate that LysM domains of the NFR1 and NFR5 receptors mediate perception of the bacterial Nod-factor signal and that recognition depends on the structure of the lipochitin–oligosaccharide Nod-factor. We show that a single amino-acid variation in the LysM2 domain of NFR5 changes recognition of the Nod-factor synthesized by the DZL strain and suggests a possible binding site for bacterial lipochitin–oligosaccharide signal molecules. Introduction Multicellular organisms share common components and strategies that enable them to distinguish between self and nonself and to establish specific cell–cell interactions (Ausubel, 2005). We investigated such mechanisms in the plant nitrogen-fixing symbiosis. In this interaction, compatible bacteria (collectively called Rhizobium) recognize specific legume hosts and induce development of root nodules, which will host the bacteria and develop into symbiotic organs. The legume–Rhizobium symbiotic interaction is a sequential process where development of nodule primordia from dedifferentiated root cortical cells initiating a meristem, and a bacterial invasion process, run in parallel. In most legumes, the process starts with rhizobial attachment to plant root hair tips. Subsequent physiological and morphological responses result in root hair curling, entrapping bacteria in an infection pocket (Oldroyd et al, 2005; Miwa et al, 2006). Inwards growing infection threads are then formed by the plant and colonized by rhizobia. These infection threads act as rhizobial conduits from which the bacterial symbiont ultimately will be endocytosed into the plant nodule cells. In a fully compatible interaction, symbiosomes consisting of membrane-enclosed rhizobia differentiated into nitrogen-fixing bacteroids will form. The developmental program leading to nodule organogenesis and infection is controlled by the legume through a suite of nodulin genes which are temporally and spatially regulated (Schultze and Kondorosi, 1998; Colebatch et al, 2004; Mergaert et al, 2006). In the model legume Lotus japonicus, perception of the rhizobial-synthesized lipochitin–oligosaccharide (Nod-factor) is required for initiation of the nodule developmental process through a signaling pathway encoded by seven genes, SymRK, Castor, Pollux, Nup133, Nup85, CCaMK and Cyclops (Kistner et al, 2005) and downstream of this pathway putative transcription factors encoded by LjNin (Schauser et al, 1999), LjNsp1 and LjNsp2 (Heckmann et al, 2006) are required for initiation of nodule organogenesis. The ability to invade roots of leguminous plants and induce development of root nodules is shared by several bacterial species belonging to both the α- and the β-proteobacteria (Moulin et al, 2001). The relationship between the app. 18 000 legume species and their bacterial microsymbionts is nevertheless selective and this specificity led to the definition of cross-inoculation groups used to describe the symbiotic diversity of legume–Rhizobium symbiosis and to classify bacterial species. Among narrow host range interactions, Sinorhizobium meliloti (S. meliloti) and alfalfa, together with other Medics like Medicago truncatula, belong to one cross-inoculation group, whereas Mesorhizobium loti (M. loti) and Lotus spp. like L. japonicus, belong to another. Reciprocal nodulation between these two groups does not occur. This catalog of cross-inoculation groups provides a practical overview of legume–Rhizobium relationships although broad host range strains like NGR234 (Pueppke and Broughton, 1999) and Bradyrhizobium sp strains lacking the common Nod-factor biosynthetic genes (Giraud et al, 2007) are difficult to accommodate. A deeper understanding of the classical symbiotic interaction involving Nod-factor signaling emerged from characterization of the two-way signal exchange. Rhizobial NodD proteins mediate host recognition by interacting with specific flavonoids or isoflavonoids exuded from host roots (Mulligan and Long, 1985; Spaink et al, 1989). Flavonoid-activated NodD promotes transcription of bacterial nod-genes involved in synthesis and secretion of lipochitin–oligosaccharides, called Nod-factors, required for initiation of nodulation (Mulligan and Long, 1985; Lerouge et al, 1990; Spaink et al, 1991). The ability of NodD to recognize the type of flavonoid exuded by the plant is one of the primary steps determining host range and expression of a constitutively active nodD transcriptional activator can extend the bacterial host range, bypassing flavonoid activation (Cardenas et al, 1995). For the rhizobial signal, the length of the Nod-factor carbohydrate moiety, the size and degree of saturation of the acyl chain and substitutions of the reducing and nonreducing glucosamine residues (Supplementary Figure 1) are characteristics for each species and these structural features determine whether the bacteria are able to infect legume plants and which plants are infected (Lerouge et al, 1990; Spaink et al, 1991; D'Haeze and Holsters, 2002 and references therein). Analysis of loss-of-function mutants has previously shown that the L. japonicus LjNfr1 and LjNfr5 genes are required for the earliest cellular and physiological responses to M. loti and M. loti synthesized Nod-factor. Neither root hair deformation, Ca2+ spiking nor induction of nodulin gene expression was detected in these mutants (Madsen et al, 2003; Radutoiu et al, 2003; Miwa et al, 2006). The corresponding receptor kinase proteins, LjNFR1 and LjNFR5, were predicted to have a topology where single pass transmembrane domains anchor LysM-containing extracellular domains and intracellular serine/threonine kinase domains (Madsen et al, 2003; Radutoiu et al, 2003). Combining this prediction with the genetic evidence, a receptor complex composed of LjNFR1 and LjNFR5 was proposed to initiate signal transduction in response to Nod-factor (Radutoiu et al, 2003). Here, we investigate the role of Nod-factor receptor genes in the biodiversity of cross-inoculation groups, and examine their role in specifying the legume's ability to distinguish between different rhizobial strains. We show that legume Nod-factor receptors are important components of the two-way signal and recognition processes determining the host range in plant-bacterial symbiotic interactions. We have further examined the selectivity of the predicted extracellular LysM domains of LjNFR1 and LjNFR5 in relation to Nod-factor recognition and the ability of rhizobial strains to induce root nodule development. We used domain swaps, amino acid substitutions and modeling to demonstrate that the LysM2 domain of NFR5 is important for Nod-factor perception, and present a model for the binding site. Results To understand the basis for host/non-host relations, we aimed to identify components required for extending the host range of wild-type legumes. Two different host plants, M. truncatula (Mt) and L filicaulis (Lf), were genetically transformed with L. japonicus (Lj) Nod-factor receptor genes, LjNfr1 and LjNfr5, and inoculated with rhizobial strains nodulating L. japonicus, but unable to nodulate M. truncatula and L. filicaulis wild-type plants. The range of bacterial strains normally able to induce a symbiotic developmental program in M. truncatula plants is limited to strains of S. meliloti, and L. filicaulis does not form nodules with the genetically modified R. leguminosarum biovar viciae DZL strain (Pacios-Bras et al, 2000, 2003), which, in contrast, induced fully infected although ineffective nodules on L. japonicus (Pacios-Bras, 2003 and this study). All the LjNfr1 and LjNfr5 gene constructs (Supplementary Table I) were transferred via A. rhizogenes into plant cells giving rise to transgenic roots (Stougaard et al, 1987; Hansen et al, 1989). Composite plants having both wild-type and transgenic roots were tested for their nodulation capacity. The rhizobial strains used to determine host range changes were M. loti, the symbiont of Lotus species and a modified R. leguminosarum bv. viciae DZL strain that contains a flavonoid-independent NodD activator, NodZ and NolL genes (Supplementary Table II). This strain synthesizes Nod-factors resembling Nod-factor synthesized by M. loti. Rhizobium strains that are not natural symbionts of M. truncatula, L. japonicus or L. filicaulis, respectively, were genetically modified with a constitutive NodD activator. This modification ensured Nod-factor synthesis independent of host-secreted flavonoids (Spaink et al, 1989). Host range extension in wild-type M. truncatula Introduction of L. japonicus LjNfr1+LjNfr5 into M. truncatula resulted in development of nodules on transgenic roots after inoculation with M. loti (Figure 1A and Supplementary Figure 2A and Supplementary Table III). Transgenic roots of composite plants (136/499 plants) formed on average 1.7 nodules per plant with M. loti (Table I). Inoculation of LjNfr1+LjNfr5-transformed M. truncatula roots with S. meliloti resulted in 5.8 nodules per transgenic root (43/56 plants). This demonstrated that both M. loti and S. meliloti were recognized by LjNfr1+LjNfr5-transformed M. truncatula roots (Figure 1A and B). Nodules were not observed on M. loti-inoculated transformed roots of M. truncatula carrying the empty vector or LjNfr1 and LjNfr5, separately (Table I; Supplementary Figure 2B). Additionally, inoculation with M. loti nodC∷Tn5, a modified strain unable to produce Nod-factors, did not result in nodule formation on LjNfr1+LjNfr5-transformed M. truncatula roots (Table I). These results demonstrated the involvement of both LjNFR1 and LjNFR5 in perception of M. loti Nod-factors and in the subsequent triggered nodule development in M. truncatula. Figure 1.Nodule development on LjNfr1+LjNfr5-transformed M. truncatula roots. (A) M. loti-induced nodule. (B) S. meliloti-induced nodule. (C) Enod12-GUS expression at different stages of M. loti-induced nodule during development. (D) Enod12-GUS expression in the M. loti-induced nodules (arrows), but not in the lateral roots (arrowheads). (E) Enod2-GUS expression in the M. loti-induced nodules (arrows) and lateral root primordia (arrowheads). (F) Section of M. loti-induced nodule. (G) Section of S. meliloti-induced and -infected nodule (H) Methylene blue staining of cleared M. loti-induced nodule. Arrows indicate peripheral vascular bundles. (I) Methylene blue staining of cleared lateral root. Arrow indicate central root vascular bundles. (J) Cell divisions in the inner cortex initiate nodule primordia (arrow) upon M. loti inoculation. Scale bars=100 μm. Download figure Download PowerPoint Table 1. Nodulation frequencies of transformed M. truncatula roots Construct Rhizobia Fraction of nodulated plants Nodules per total plants Vector Uninoculated 0/98 0 M. loti 0/295 0 M. loti nodC∷Tn5 0/20 0 DZLa 0/50 0 S. meliloti 58/69 5.0 LjNfr1 Uninoculated 0/20 0 M. loti 0/59 0 DZLa 0/29 0 S. meliloti 37/43 6.9 LjNfr5 Uninoculated 0/18 0 M. loti 0/79 0 DZLa 0/30 0 S. meliloti 34/43 4.5 LjNfr1+LjNfr5 Uninoculated 0/111 0 M. loti 136/499 1.7 M. loti nodC∷Tn5 0/51 0 DZLa 22/42 3.4 S. meliloti 43/56 5.8 a R. leguminosarum bv. viciae 5560 strain DZL. Nodulin gene expression in M. loti induced M. truncatula nodules Plant genes known as nodulins are sequentially activated or upregulated after compatible rhizobial inoculation or Nod-factor application on host legume roots, and their expression serves as molecular markers for Nod-factor perception, nodule organogenesis and rhizobial infection (Schultze and Kondorosi, 1998; Stougaard, 2000). To confirm that M. loti-induced nodules on LjNfr1+LjNfr5-transformed M. truncatula roots indeed result from activation of the symbiotic developmental program, the expression of nodulin genes (Enod11, Enod12, Enod2, N6 and Nin) was monitored by quantitative RT–PCR or promoter-GUS activation. Enod11 and Enod12 mark the early symbiotic events in root epidermis and cortex, whereas in nodules their expression was correlated with the presence of infection threads (Journet et al, 2001). N6 expression was associated with plant cell preparation for rhizobial infection (Mathis et al, 1999). Nin regulates infection thread formation and nodule primordia initiation, whereas Enod2 was induced at a later time point upon infection, being expressed in the nodule parenchyma cells during development (Lauridsen et al, 1993; Vijn et al, 1995; Schauser et al, 1999; Marsh et al, 2007). MtEnod11, MtN6 and MtNin were upregulated in nodules induced by M. loti on LjNfr1+LjNfr5-transformed M. truncatula roots (Figure 2). Confirming this, the promoter-GUS reporter analyses showed stage- and tissue-specific activation of Enod12 and Enod2 nodulin gene promoters in M. loti-inoculated LjNfr1+LjNfr5-transformed M. truncatula roots. The Enod12 promoter was induced in root cortical cells where nodule primordia formed and showed a developmental activation pattern typical for indeterminate nodules (Figure 1C and D and Supplementary Figure 2C). The Enod2 promoter was activated in the young nodule primordia and lateral root meristems (Figure 1E and Supplementary Figure 2D). Activation of genes involved specifically in the nodule developmental program and bacterial infection demonstrated that M. loti inoculation induced a symbiotic developmental program in M. truncatula roots carrying LjNfr1+LjNfr5 genes. Figure 2.Expression of MtEnod11 (A), MtNin (B) and MtN6 (C) nodulin genes in roots and nodules of transformed M. truncatula. Transcript levels of MtEnod11, MtNin and MtN6 nodulin genes were determined by quantitative PCR. Induction of MtEnod11, MtNin and MtN6 in nodules formed upon S. meliloti inoculation of transformed M. truncatula control roots (left, A. rhizogenes empty vector), and in nodules formed upon M. loti inoculation of LjNfr1+Nfr5-transformed M. truncatula roots (right). Quantification of expression levels shows the induction of these nodulin genes in both M. loti and S. meliloti nodules compared to root tissue. Relative expression was determined as normalized ratios of the three nodulin genes and three housekeeping genes. Error bars represent the corresponding upper and lower 95% confidence intervals. Download figure Download PowerPoint Ontogeny and anatomy of M. loti-induced M. truncatula nodules Nodules induced by M. loti on LjNfr1+LjNfr5-transformed M. truncatula roots show morphological and anatomical features similar to S. meliloti-induced nodules, but with no evidence for bacterial endocytosis into the plant cells as seen for the natural symbiont (Figure 1A, B, F and G). Staining of vascular tissues and microscopical analyses of semi-thin sections revealed branched peripheral vascular bundles connecting the nodules with root vasculature (Figure 1H), distinguishing them from lateral roots that have a central vasculature (Figure 1I). The M. loti-induced nodules originated from inner cortical cells (Figure 1J) and developed opposite protoxylem poles (Supplementary Figure 2D). These features are histological hallmarks of indeterminate M. truncatula root nodules induced by S. meliloti (Vasse et al, 1990; Figure 1B and G). Infection threads were observed using confocal microscopy after inoculation of LjNfr1+LjNfr5-transformed M. truncatula roots with M. loti expressing an eGFP marker gene to visualize rhizobia. In contrast to the tubular appearance and root penetration of infection threads (Giovanelli et al, 2006) observed upon S. meliloti inoculation (3.9 infection threads/cm), most of the M. loti-induced infection threads were arrested inside the root hairs or ended in the epidermal cell layer with a swollen sac-like structure often observed when bacterial invasion is unsuccessful (Figure 3A and B). In few cases, some of these infection threads branched and progressed through the root cortical cell layers and reached the nodule primordia (Supplementary Figure 3A). However, no endocytosis of M. loti and therefore no symbiosome formation was observed (data not shown). On average, one M. loti-induced infection thread was counted per 3 cm of LjNfr1+LjNfr5-transformed M. truncatula root and 10% of the analyzed nodules contained branched infection threads. The histological characteristics of nodules, and the presence of infection threads demonstrated that M. loti was recognized as a symbiont by M. truncatula roots carrying LjNfr1+LjNfr5 genes. Hence, expression of LjNfr1 and LjNfr5 genes in M. truncatula confers a Nod-factor-dependent extension of host range. Figure 3.Microscopic analyses of Rhizobium infection phenotypes on LjNfr1+LjNfr5-transformed M. truncatula roots. (A) Infection thread induced by M. loti stopped in the epidermal layer (arrow). (B) Infection thread induced by S. meliloti penetrates the root (C) S. meliloti infected nodule showing mainly endocytosed bacteria. (D) DZL induced infection thread penetrating a nodule primordium. (E) DZL-induced infection threads invaded the nodule tissue in a similar manner as S. meliloti. (F) DZL induced infection threads (arrow) penetrate the nodule. Inset: close-up of the nodule tissue with DZL-induced infection threads spreading in-between the cells, ending with a sac-like structure (arrow). (G) Sac-like structure (arrow) formed in the epidermal cell layer at the end of DZL-induced infection thread. (H) DZL bacteria colonizing the nodule intercellular space (arrow) is not endocytosed in the plant cells. (I) S. meliloti endocytosis (arrow) from infection thread into the nodule cell. Scale bars=100 μm in panels A–F, 2 μm in panels G and H, and 1 μm in I. Panels A–E are confocal images showing rhizobia marked with GFP (green), (G–I) are electron micrograph images. Notice bacteria (labeled with GFP) are contained in the infection threads induced by all three Rhizobium strains. Download figure Download PowerPoint Increased infection thread progression in DZL induced M. truncatula nodules The LjNFR1- and LjNFR5-mediated nodulation of M. truncatula was further examined using an alternative microsymbiont, R. leguminosarum bv. viciae strain DZL, recognized by L. japonicus (Pacios-Bras et al, 2000, 2003) but not by M. truncatula (Table I). Similar to our observation using M. loti, transfer of LjNfr1+LjNfr5 extended the host range of M. truncatula to include the DZL strain and nodules developed on transgenic roots of 22/42 plants. Transgenic LjNfr1+LjNfr5 M. truncatula roots inoculated with DZL developed on average more nodules (3.4) than those inoculated with M. loti (1.7) (Table I). Confocal microscopy on LjNfr1+LjNfr5-transformed M. truncatula roots inoculated with eGFP marked DZL bacteria (Figure 3D and E) revealed an invasion process similar to the early phases of S. meliloti invasion of wild-type M. truncatula (Figure 3B and C; Giovanelli et al, 2006). Most infection threads were tubular and arrested in root hairs or at the first epidermal cell layer. However, when infection threads were associated with nodule primordia, they progressed (Figure 3D), branched and invaded the nodule primordia (Figure 3E and F). Compared to M. loti, a larger number of infection threads were formed (1.6/cm), indicating a more effective interaction between DZL and the new host. Nevertheless, confocal, light and electron microscopy revealed that DZL infection threads end inside the nodules in expanded sac-like structures (Figure 3F–H and Supplementary Figure 3B). Most DZL bacteria colonized the nodule intercellular spaces (Figure 3H and Supplementary Figure 3B), and compared to S. meliloti inoculation (Figure 3I and Supplementary Figure 3C), no symbiosomes were observed. Whereas M. truncatula control roots showed no root hair deformations upon inoculation with M. loti and DZL, the root hairs of LjNfr1-transformed M. truncatula roots showed a minor reorientation of root hair tip growth (Supplementary Figure 4A). The root hairs of LjNfr5-transformed M. truncatula roots curled and entrapped M. loti or DZL bacteria, without infection thread formation (Supplementary Figure 4B). However, the root hair response was not followed by the activation of Enod12 gene promoter in M. loti-inoculated transformed roots (Supplementary Figure 4C) showing that activation of this nodulin gene expression requires the presence of both LjNfr1 and LjNfr5 (Figure 1C and D and Supplementary Figure 2C). Expression of both LjNfr1 and LjNfr5 genes in M. truncatula under the control of L. japonicus promoters therefore ensured M. loti and DZL recognition, infection thread formation and nodule organogenesis, but the resulting nodules arrest in late development before endocytosis and symbiosome formation. Host range extension in L. filicaulis In contrast to L. japonicus, the close relative L. filicaulis was not infected by the DZL strain (Pacios-Bras, 2003; Figures 4A and 5A, B, G–I). As a first approach to determine the basis of this difference in DZL strain specificity between L. japonicus and L. filicaulis, we tested whether introduction of LjNfr1 and LjNfr5 genes into transgenic roots would enable L. filicaulis to develop nodules with DZL. At 7 weeks after inoculation, 6.5% of L. filicaulis plants transformed with LjNfr1+LjNfr5 had developed nodules with DZL on the transformed roots (23/349 plants), whereas no nodules were observed on transgenic L. filicaulis roots (243 plants) transformed with empty vector (Figures 4A, B and 5C, F, J). L. filicaulis plants transformed with LjNfr1 or LjNfr5 separately formed nodules on 0.65% (1/154) and 1.7% (3/180) of the transgenic roots, respectively (Figures 4B and 5D, E). These results show that both genes contributed to the changed specificity. Control L. filicaulis roots transformed with LjNfr1+LjNfr5 or empty vector (Figure 4C) were all nodulated by M. loti at comparable, normal efficiencies, showing that transgenic roots of L. filicaulis can be effectively nodulated and that concomitant transfer of LjNfr1 and LjNfr5 receptor genes does not perturb nodulation by the M. loti symbiont compatible with both L. filicaulis and L. japonicus. A reduction of the nodulation frequency of M. loti on L. filicaulis was observed after separate transfer of LjNfr1 or LjNfr5 possibly due to an imbalance between NFR1 and NFR5 receptors (Figure 4C). We conclude that LjNFR1 and LjNFR5 act in concert to confer perception of DZL Nod-factor molecules in L. filicaulis. Figure 4.Receptor-mediated nodulation response of L. japonicus and L. filicaulis. (A) Nodulation efficiency of A. rhizogenes transformed wild-type plants inoculated with either DZL or M. loti. (B) Nodulation frequency of DZL inoculated L. filicaulis roots carrying the AR12 empty vector, LjNfr1 or LjNfr5 individually, or LjNfr1+LjNfr5 together. (C) Nodulation frequency of M. loti inoculated L. filicaulis roots carrying Nfr1 or Nfr5 individually, Nfr1+Nfr5 together or the AR12 empty vector. (D, E) Schematic outline of the chimeric receptor genes composed of segments encoding L. filicaulis LysM domains (gray) inserted into L. japonicus Nfr1 and Nfr5 genes. (F) Complementation efficiency in Ljnfr1nfr5 double mutants transformed with either L. japonicus LjNfr1+LjNfr5 wild-type genes or chimeric FinG1+FinG5 genes and inoculated with either DZL or M. loti. (G) Complementation efficiency in Ljnfr1 mutants transformed with either LjNfr1 or chimeric FinG1 gene and inoculated with either DZL or M. loti. (H) Complementation efficiency in Ljnfr5 mutants transformed with either LjNfr5 or chimeric FinG5 gene and inoculated with either DZL or M. loti. The number of plants scored for nodulation is shown in parenthesis. Error bars represent the 95% confidence intervals. Download figure Download PowerPoint Figure 5.Nodulation phenotype of L. filicaulis and L. japonicus plants inoculated with M. loti and R. leguminosarum bv. viciae DZL. (A, B) Root segments showing the nodulation phenotype of L. japonicus (A) and L. filicaulis (B) when inoculated with M. loti. (C) Nodulation phenotype of L. filicaulis transformed with LjNfr1+LjNfr5 inoculated with DZL. (D–F) Nodules formed by DZL on L. filicaulis transformed with LjNfr1 (D), LjNfr5 (E) and LjNfr1+LjNfr5 (F). (G–J) Thin sections of L. japonicus (G, I) and L. filicaulis (H) or L. filicaulis transformed with L. japonicus Nfr1+Nfr5 (J) infected by M. loti (G, H) or DZL (I, J). Sections