Molecular Plant • Volume 1 • Number 3 • Pages 528–537 • May 2008RESEARCH ARTICLE
Altered Disease Development in the eui Mutants
and EuiOverexpressors Indicates that Gibberellins
Negatively Regulate Rice Basal Disease Resistance
Dong-Lei Yanga, Qun Lia, Yi-Wen Denga, Yong-Gen Loub, Mu-Yang Wanga, Guo-Xing Zhoub,
Ying-Ying Zhangaand Zu-Hua Hea,1
a National Key Laboratory of Plant Molecular Genetics, Institute of Plant Physiology and Ecology, Shanghai Institutes for Biological Sciences, Chinese Academy
of Sciences, Shanghai, China
b Institute of Insect Science, College of Agriculture and Biotechnology, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
However, the role of GAs in biotic stress is largely unknown. Here, we report that knockout or overexpression of the
Elongated uppermost internode (Eui) gene encoding a GA deactivating enzyme compromises or increases, respectively,
disease resistance to bacterial blight (Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oyrzae) and rice blast (Magnaporthe oryzae). Exogenous
application of GA3and the inhibitor of GA synthesis (uniconazol) could increase disease susceptibility and resistance,
respectively, to bacterial blight. Similarly, uniconazol restored disease resistance of the eui mutant and GA3decreased
disease resistance of the Eui overexpressors to bacterial blight. Therefore, the change of resistance attributes to GA levels.
In consistency with this, the GA metabolism genes OsGA20ox2 and OsGA2ox1 were down-regulated during pathogen
challenge. We also found that PR1a induction was enhanced but the SA level was decreased in the Eui overexpressor,
while the JA level was reduced in the eui mutant. Together, our current study indicates that GAs play a negative role
in rice basal disease resistance, with EUI as a positive modulator through regulating the level of bioactive GAs.
Gibberellins (GAs) form a group of important plant tetracyclic diterpenoid hormones that are involved in
Plants encounter various abiotic and biotic environmental
stresses during their lifetimes. They have to modulate growth
anddevelopmenttoadapt todifferent stressconditions.Many
constitutive defense mutants, such as cpr1, mpk4, bon1, and
mekk1, reduce growth (Bowling et al., 1994; Petersen et al.,
2000; Yang and Hua, 2004; Ichimura et al., 2006), indicating
that defense response may down-regulate growth and devel-
opment. This hypothesis is further supported by the snc1 yucca
and cpr6 yucca double mutants in which the phenotypes of
yucca are mostly suppressed by snc1 or cpr6, which are in-
volved in disease resistance (Wang et al., 2007a). On the other
hand, mutation of genes that are involved in growth and de-
velopment, like axr2 (Wang et al., 2007a) and as1 (Nurmberg
et al., 2007), enhance disease resistance; thus, defense re-
sponse antagonizes development and growth in many cases.
It is well known that salicylic acid (SA), jasmonic acid (JA),
and ethylene (ET) are the phytohormones involved in disease
resistance. Recently, the development-regulating hormones
abscisic acid (ABA) (de Torres-Zabala et al., 2007; Adie et al.,
2007), cytokinin (Siemens et al., 2006), auxin (Navarro et al.,
2006; Wang et al., 2007a; Zhang et al., 2007), and brassinoste-
disease resistance. ABA is an important hormone that is
involved in many aspects of plant development and responses
to abiotic stress, such as drought, low temperature, and salinity,
and also acts as a negative regulator in many defense responses
(Mauch-Mani and Mauch, 2005; de Torres-Zabala et al., 2007).
Auxin regulates almost all growth and development pro-
cesses in plants. It has been shown that Agrobacterium tume-
faciens, Agrobacterium rhizogenes, and other gall-forming
bacteria can produce the hormone for their fitness in the
host (Robert-Seilaniantz et al., 2007). Pseudomonas syringae
(P. syringae) secretes the type III effector AvrRpt2 to modulate
Interestingly, a member of the GH3 family of early auxin-
responsive genes, GH3.5, acts as a bifunctional modulator in
1To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail firstname.lastname@example.org,
ª The Author 2008. Published by the Molecular Plant Shanghai Editorial
Office in association with Oxford University Press on behalf of CSPP and
IPPE, SIBS, CAS.
doi: 10.1093/mp/ssn021, Advance Access publication 29 April 2008
by guest on June 9, 2013
bothSA and auxin signaling during pathogen infection in Ara-
of auxin signaling, through down-regulating the auxin recep-
ogen flagellin-derived peptide flg22, resulted in increased
resistance (Navarro et al., 2006). These studies indicate that
auxin plays an important role in disease susceptibility path-
ways. Consistent with these observations, recently, it has been
shown that SA enhances disease resistance partially through
repression of auxin signaling (Wang et al., 2007a).
Cytokinin homeostasis genes were down-regulated during
the Arabidopsis–Plasmodiophora brassicae interaction; over-
expression of the cytokinin degradation genes could enhance
disease resistance to the pathogen (Siemens et al., 2006). By
contrast, another growth-regulating hormone, brassinoste-
roid, could increase disease resistance in rice and tobacco
(Nakashita et al., 2003). These data suggest that plants might
employ different hormone signaling pathways to manipulate
growth, development, and defense responses during patho-
that regulate many aspects of growth and development in
plants, including seed germination, stem elongation, and
flowering. GAs were originally identified from the fungal
pathogen Gibberella fujikuroi (Yabuta and Sumiki, 1938),
which causes super-elongated rice, named bakanea rice. GA-
deficient fungal mutants do not affect fungal development,
suggesting that GAs produced by fungal pathogens may
have a pathogenicity role in plants (reviewed by Robert-
Seilaniantz et al., 2007). A direct link of GA biosynthesis with
plant disease symptoms came from the rice dwarf virus (RDV)
study showing that the outer capsid protein P2 of RDV inter-
acts with the host ent–kaurene oxidases (KAO), which play
a key role in the biosynthesis of GAs (Zhu et al., 2005). They
also found that KAO expression was reduced in the infected
plants, leading to decreased levels of GA1in the infected
plants. Moreover, the interaction between P2 and rice
ent–kaurene oxidase-like proteins may decrease phytoalexin
biosynthesis and make plants more competent for virus rep-
lication. ELONGATED UPPERMOST INTERNODE (EUI) is a P450
monooxygenase identified recently in our laboratory, which
deactivates biologically active GAs through a novel reaction
late large amounts of bioactive GAs and extremely elongate
the uppermost internode, whereas overexpression of Eui
resulted in the GA-deficient phenotype with severe dwarfing,
dark-green leaves, and male sterility (Xu et al., 2004; Zhu et
al., 2006). Interestingly, the GA-overproducing eui rice seems
more susceptible to bacterial and fungal pathogens in the
field (Yang and He, unpublished data), implying that GA ho-
meostasis may cross-talk with disease resistance. However,
the underlying mechanism of this GA-related susceptibility
In this work, we compared disease resistance in the eui
mutants and the Eui overexpressors (Eui–OX) with the corre-
sponding wild types, and the effects of exogenous application
of GA and the GA synthesis inhibitor on rice basal disease re-
sistance to bacterial blight (Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oyrzae,
Xoo) and fungal blast (Magnaporthe oryzae, M. oryzae)—two
of the most destructive diseases in rice. We demonstrate that
the GA-mediated development actively impacts in disease re-
sistance in rice, revealing another dimension of the complex
cross-talk between development and defense.
eui Mutants Are More Susceptible to Bacterial Blight
In order to examine the role of Eui-mediated GA homeostasis
in disease resistance, three alleles of the eui mutation and
their corresponding wild-type plants (Zhu et al., 2006) were
inoculated with Xoo Philippine race 6 (strain PXO99A) and
Korean race 1 (strain DY89031) using the leaf-clipping
method. Lesion lengths of more than 50 leaves for each line
were recorded at 14 d post inoculation (dpi). As shown in
Figure 1, the mutants displayed significantly longer lesion
to PXO99A than their controls. Similar results were obtained
with infection by DY89031 (data not shown). Similarly, the
representative transgenic lines S73 and S74, in which Eui
expression was knocked down with RNAi (Zhang et al.,
2008), phenocopied the susceptibility of the eui mutants to
both the strains (Figure 2A and 2B and Supplemental Figure
1A). We also observed slightly enhanced resistance to Xoo
in semi-dwarf rice containing the mutant ‘Green Revolution’
Figure 1. Enhanced Susceptibility to Xoo in the eui Mutants.
Eight-week-old plants were inoculated with Xoo strain PXO99A
using the leaf-clipping method in the eui mutants and the
corresponding wild types. The lesion length of more than 50 leaves
was recorded after 2 weeks. Bars indicate standard error. ** indi-
cates that lesions of the eui mutants were significantly longer than
their wild types (student’s t-test: P = 0.004 with eui-1 and ZS97,
P = 4.1E–12 with eui-3 and ZH11, P = 1E–8 with eui-4 and
02428). These experiments were repeated three times, with
Yang et al.
dGibberellin Regulates Disease Resistance | 529
by guest on June 9, 2013
gene sd1, in comparison with the near-isogenic tall rice
carrying the wild-type Sd1 gene that encodes a GA20 oxidase
(data not shown; Sasaki et al., 2002). Therefore, the loss of
function of Eui decreased disease resistance, suggesting
that EUI might be a positive modulator of basal disease resis-
tance in rice.
Overexpression of Eui Increases Disease Resistance to
We further analyzed disease resistance of the Eui over-
expressors, Eui–OX (Zhu et al., 2006). These dwarf Eui–OX
lines exhibited significantly increased disease resistance as
compared with the wild-type and the separated negative
transgenic plants (Figure 2 and Supplemental Figure 1B).
We also observed that dwarf severity was somehow correlated
with resistance degree, since lines OX-21, OX-22, OX-39, and
OX-47 were more dwarf and appeared more resistant than
OX-7, OX-11, and OX-15 (Figure 2B and data not shown). In
consistency with disease symptom, a three- to five-fold reduc-
tion in bacterial growth was measured in OX-39 compared
with the wild-type at 8–14 dpi. These results further support
the notion that EUI positively regulates disease resistance
against bacterial blight.
Silence of Eui Leads to Reduction of Resistance and
Overexpression of Eui Enhances Resistance to
Rice Blast Fungus
We have shown that the eui mutants and Eui overexpressors
exhibited opposite resistance phenotypes to bacterial blight.
We next determined whether the EUI-mediated development
process also modulates disease resistance to rice blast. The
RNAi lines S73 and S74 exhibited slightly severer symptoms
than the wild-type (Figure 3A and 3B). For grade 5 disease in-
dex (the most susceptible symptom), S73 and S74 displayed 20
and 19%, respectively, in comparison with 9% in the wild-type
(Figure 3B). Similar reduction of blast resistance was also ob-
served in the eui-1 mutant (data not shown). In contrast, the
overexpression lines OX-7, OX-11, OX-21, and OX-39 exhibited
Figure 2. Enhanced Resistance to Xoo PXO99A in the Eui Overexpressors.
(A) Disease symptoms of the Eui overexpressors OX-7 and OX-39, the RNAi line S73 and the wild-type TP309 at 14 dpi with Xoo strain
(B) Lesion lengths of the Eui overexpressors and RNAi lines in comparison with the wild-type. More than 50 leaves for each line were
recorded. ** indicates that the P-value was less than 0.0001. This experiment was repeated independently three times, with similar results.
(C) The growth of Xoo strain PXO99A in OX-39 (square) and the wild-type TP309 (triangle). Three leaves of each line at the appointed time
were ground and the diluted extractions were incubated on potato sucrose agar medium with 200 lM azacytidine. Colony-forming units
(CFUs) were counted after 3 d. This experiment was repeated, with similar results.
530 | Yang et al.
dGibberellin Regulates Disease Resistance
by guest on June 9, 2013
significantly enhanced resistance to the fungus, with 70–83%
of grade 0 and 1, in comparison with 18% in the wild-type,
while the percentages for grades 4 and 5 were greatly de-
creased in these lines (Figure 3B). The further determination
of fungal growth in the host using Southern hybridization
that fungal growth was greatly limited in the Eui overexpres-
wild-type (Figure 3C). These data demonstrated that Eui also
positively regulates resistance to rice blast.
GAs Negatively Regulate Disease Resistance
EUI is an enzyme that deactivates bioactive GAs, the eui
mutants and the overexpression transgenic plants accumulate
high or low levels of bioactive GAs, respectively (Zhu et al.,
2006). Therefore, we logically speculate that GA accumulation
negatively regulates basal defense. To further examine this hy-
pothesis, we treated rice with either GA3(10 lM) or the GA
biosynthesis inhibitor uniconazol (10 lM) before inoculation
with Xoo. As expected, the plants treated with GA3displayed
longer lesions, and those treated with uniconazol exhibited
shorter lesions in comparison with the non-treated control
resistance, we applied GA3or uniconazol on the Eui overex-
pressors and the RNAi lines before inoculation with Xoo.
GA3suppressed disease resistance of the Eui overexpressors,
while uniconazol restored basal resistance in the RNAi lines
resistance, and the changes of resistance in the eui mutants
and Eui overexprssors most likely attributed to the endoge-
nous GA-level alteration.
SA and JA Levels Decrease Respectively in the
Eui Overexpressors and eui Mutant
The antagonistic interaction between the SA-dependent and
JA/ET-dependent defense pathways in Arabidopsis is well
known (Thomma et al., 1998; Petersen et al., 2000; Spoel
et al., 2003; Li et al., 2004). Interestingly, the loss-of-function
mutants in DELLAs, the suppressors of the GA signaling
Figure 3. Enhanced Resistance to M.
oryzae in the Eui Overexpressors.
(A) Disease symptoms of rice blast in
OX-7, S73, and the wild-type TP309.
Two-week-old seedlings were inocu-
lated with M. oryzae ZB1. The photo-
graph was taken at 5 dpi.
(B) Blast diseaseseverityof OX-7,OX-
11, OX-21, OX-39, S73, and S74 com-
pared with the wild-type. More than
100 seedlings for each line were an-
alyzed. The criterion of grade was
described in the Methods section.
(C) Detection of M. oryzae in-planta
growth by Southern hybridization
using the fungal 28S rDNA as probe.
Rice leaves at 1 and 4 dpi were har-
vested for DNA extraction and each
lane contained about 20 lg DNA as
detected by ethidium bromide (EtBr)
Figure 4. Exogenous Application of GA3and Uniconazol Changes
Eight-week-old plants were treated with 10 lM GA3or 10 lM uni-
conazol; 1 week later, the plants were inoculated with Xoo strain
PXO99A. More than 50 leaves were recorded for lesion length at
14 dpi. P-values for each treatment were less than 0.0001 with stu-
dent’s t-test analysis.
Yang et al.
dGibberellin Regulates Disease Resistance | 531
by guest on June 9, 2013
pathway, up-regulate the SA-mediated defense and down-
regulate the JA/ET-mediated defense in Arabidopsis (Robert-
Seilaniantz et al., 2007). In rice, endogenous SA protects rice
from oxidative stress and the SA-deficient transgenic NahG
plants are more susceptible to M. oryzae (Yang et al., 2004),
while enhancing JA generation could increase PR expression
and blast resistance (Mei et al., 2006). This led us to analyze
SA and JA levels in the eui mutant and Eui overexpressors.
The SA level did not change in the eui mutant but significantly
vious result that the transgenic poplar plants overproducing
mutant DELLA protein gai1 or rgl1 accumulated less SA (Busov
et al., 2006). However, the decreased SA level seemed not to
trast to the NahG plants that mostly deprive SA (Yang et al.,
2004). The JA level was reduced in the eui mutant but main-
result suggests that the enhanced disease susceptibility of the
Expression Patterns of Pathogenesis- and GA-Related
Genes in the Eui Overexpression Plants
In order to investigate the potential molecular mechanisms of
the GA-mediated disease susceptibility, we first analyzed the
induction of pathogenesis-related (PR) genes in wild-type
and Eui overexpressor and RNAi plants during infection by
M. oryzae. As shown in Figure 6A, PR1a induction was en-
hanced at 12 h but greatly decreased to the control level at
96 h post inoculation (hpi) in the overexpressor compared
with its pattern in the wild-type. Its induction appeared
delayed in the RNAi S73 compared with the wild-type. We
did not observe differential expression of PR1b and PR10 in
these plants (Figure 6A). These results implied that GA homeo-
stasis might modulate the induction dynamics of specific PR
genes in rice.
We also analyzed the GA biosynthesis gene GA20ox2
(Sd1) and the GA catabolism gene GA2ox1 during blast infec-
tion. Interestingly, both GA20ox2 and GA2ox1 were down-
regulated with similar expression patterns in the wild-type
and the Eui overexpressor (Figure 6B). GA2ox1 is also down-
regulated, while GA20ox2 seems less affected in S73 with un-
known mechanism. This result was reminiscent of cytokinin
synthases and oxidases, which were both down-regulated
during the Arabidopsis–Plasmodiophora brassicae interaction,
while overexpression of cytokinin oxidases enhanced resis-
tance (Siemens et al., 2006). Consistently with their patho-
revealed several pathogen-responsive W-boxes within the 1-
kb promoter regions of GA20ox2 and GA2ox1 (Figure 6C).
These results suggest that GA homeostasis could be regulated
during the rice–M. oryzae interaction. In addition, we did not
observe expression change of SLR1 during blast infection,
which encodes a DELLA protein in rice GA signaling (Ikeda
et al., 2001). Whether GA signaling changes during this path-
ogenesis process requires further investigation.
GA-Mediated Development Cross-Talks with Defense
Gibberellins are widely recognized as phytohormones that
regulate plant growth and development. Although the GA
level is observed as reduced during virus infection in rice
(Zhu et al., 2005), there is a lack of fundamental information
on GA effects on disease resistance. Here, we have demon-
strated that GAs exhibit a negative effect on basal disease
resistance through genetic and physiological analysis. Our cur-
rent study would shed light on obscure roles of the diterpe-
noid hormone on biotic stress.
The mutations of the DELLA proteins cause Arabidopsis
to be more resistant to the biotrophic pathogen Pst
DC3000 and more susceptible to the necrotrophic pathogen
A. brassicicola (Robert-Seilaniantz et al., 2007). These studies
in resistance to different pathogens in Arabidopsis. Our results
indicate that GAs display negative roles in resistance to both
biotrophic(Xoo) and hemibiotrophic (M. oryzae) pathogensin
rice. These observations suggest that GAs, in addition to auxin
Figure 5. The SA and JA Levels in the eui Mutant and Eui Overex-
(A) The SA levels of 2-week-old seedling leaves were detected by
HPLC with three biological repeats. FW, fresh weight.
(B) JAs were extracted from 2-week-old seedling leaves and were
measured by GC–MS. Experiments were repeated three times,
with similar results. * indicates the P-value of less than 0.05 using
532 | Yang et al.
dGibberellin Regulates Disease Resistance
by guest on June 9, 2013
(Zhang et al., 2007), may be another virulent factor in disease
susceptibility. It would be interesting to further examine
resistance phenotypes of the GA signaling mutants such as
slr1, gid1, and gid2 mutants in rice.
bacteria produce auxin and cytokinin that are required for dis-
ease development (Robert-Seilaniantz et al., 2007). ABA is also
produced by saprophytic and parasitic fungi (Mauch-Mani and
Mauch, 2005). The functional analog of JA, coronatine, is se-
creted by P. syringae to suppress the SA-mediated defense
(Kloek et al., 2001) and ABA-mediated stomatal closure
G. fujikuroi, causing bakanae disease in rice. Another phyto-
pathogenic fungus, Sphaceloma sp., can also produce GAs
and causes super-elongation disease (Hiroshi, 2006). However,
there is no information on pathogenicity of those fungal
enous and exogenous GAs have negative roles in disease resis-
tance to bacterial and fungal pathogens. We propose that GAs
Moreover, some host GA synthesis and signaling components
may be potential targets of pathogen virulence effectors, as
discovered with the virus P2 protein (Zhu et al., 2005).
Antagonism between Disease Resistance and
Growth versus retardation of plants is fine-tuned under dif-
ferent conditions. Plants relocate the resource and produce
defensive components upon pathogen attack. Therefore,
growth could be limited in defensive situations (Purrington,
2000). Many Arabidopsis mutants constitutively expressing de-
fense-related genes, such as mpk4, cpr1, snc1, bon1, and
mekk1, exhibit growth defects and dwarfism. Interestingly,
other mutants, such as pad4, sid2, and rar1, that compromise
disease resistance can rescue the growth retardation of these
growth-defective mutants, while reducing the resistance abil-
ity (Petersen et al., 2000; Jirage et al; 2001; Zhang et al., 2003;
Yang and Hua, 2004; Ichimura et al., 2006). On the other hand,
some mutants defective in growth can enhance disease resis-
tance. For example, the gain-of-function mutation of AXR2/
IAA7 results in growth and development defects (Nagpal
et al., 2000), but enhances disease resistance (Wang et al.,
2007a). ASYMMETRIC LEAVES 1 (AS1) is a key regulator of leaf
development and stem cell function (Byrne et al., 2000); its
loss-of-function mutant enhances resistance against necrotro-
ease resistance can antagonize plant growth, as proposed
previously (Purrington, 2000).
Incontrast, somecomponentsarerequiredfor bothdefense
and normal development. BAK1 (BRI1-associated kinase 1)
regulates both brassinosteroid-dependent development and
brassinosteroid-independent defense response (Chinchilla
et al., 2007; He et al., 2007; Heese et al., 2007; Kemmerling
et al., 2007). The MAPK signaling pathway regulates innate
immunity in plants; the components MKK4/MKK5-MPK3/
MPK6 were found to be involved in stomatal differentiation
(Wang et al., 2007b). Because diverse signaling pathways or-
chestrate the development in plants, it is reasonable to spec-
ulate that cross-talks widely exists between defense responses
Figure 6. The Expression Patterns of Pathogenisis- and GA-Related Genes during the Rice–Blast Interaction.
(A) The induction of PR1a, PR1b, and PR10 after inoculation with M. oryzae, detected by RT–PCR using actin as control.
(B) The expression patterns of GA2ox1, GA20ox2, and SLR1 after inoculation with M. oryzae, detected by RT–PCR using actin as control.
(C) W-box locations in the 1-kb promoter regions of GA2ox1 and GA20ox2. There are eight and thirteen W-boxes in the regionsof GA20ox2
and GA2ox1, respectively. The elements in the sense and antisense strands are indicated above and below the lines, respectively. Numbers
indicate locations within the 1-kb promoter region.
Yang et al.
dGibberellin Regulates Disease Resistance | 533
by guest on June 9, 2013
Crop ‘Green Revolution’, which largely increases grain pro-
duction, was achieved by the application of the GA malfunc-
tion mutant sd1 in rice and rht in wheat. Sd1 encodesGA20ox2
that synthesizes bioactive GAs and its loss-of-function mutants
RHT is a DELLA protein that represses the GA signaling path-
way; its gain-of-function is also desirable semi-dwarf (Peng
et al., 1999). We observed that tall eui rice plants were more
susceptible and dwarf plants exhibited enhanced disease resis-
tance (Figures 1 and 2 and data not shown). Thus, the increase
partially to increased disease resistance in rice and wheat. This
might further provide a practical approach to crop design
breeding for a better yield potential and disease resistance.
Possible Mechanisms of GA-Modulated Disease Resistance
Although we detected the down-regulation of the GA biosyn-
thesis and metabolism genes, changes of SA or JA levels, and
different expression of PR1a in the eui mutant and Eui over-
expressors, the mechanism of the GA involvement in disease
resistance remains largely unknown currently. One possibility
is that GA has negative regulatory roles on expression of a spe-
cific set of PR genes, including PR1a, to support pathogen
growth. Another possibility is that GA may modify plant me-
ces or increased nutrient efflux favoring microbes, as observed
in the auxin-mediated susceptibility (Zhang et al., 2007). In
supporting the latter possibility, the evidence showed that
the transgenic poplar overexpressing the mutant DELLA pro-
teins gai1 and rgl1, which constitutively repress GA signaling
galactose (Busov et al., 2006). Metabolism changes may also
result in cell wall modification, known to be a critical aspect
of the plant basal defense. Many mutants defective in cell wall
formation, such as the callose synthesis gene powdery mildew
resistant 4 (Nishimura et al., 2003), powdery mildew resistant 5
affecting pectin composition (Vogel et al., 2002), botrytis-
resistant 1 encoding long-chain acyl–CoA synthetase 2 (LACS2)
(Bessire et al., 2007), three cellulose synthetase genes (CESA4/
IRREGULAR XYLEM5, CESA7/IRX3, and CESA/IRX1) for second-
ary cell wall formation (Herna ´ndez-Blanco et al., 2007), are
more resistant to pathogens. Similarly to overexpression of
AtGA2ox in tobacco (Biemelt et al., 2004), we observed that
Eui overexpression also decreased lignin content (data not
shown). The variation of cell wall composition may modulate
disease resistance in Eui–OX.
There is also the third possibility that GA may directly mod-
ulate SA and/or JA homeostasis. However, rice plants accumu-
late high levels of SA (Silverman et al., 1995; Chen et al., 1997;
Yuan et al., 2007); a slight change in the SA level unlikely
results in the altered disease resistance observed in this study.
It will be informative to conduct detailed microarray analysis
of GA-, SA-, JA-, and pathogen-induced global expression pro-
files of rice genes in which defense signaling keeps being
established, which might provide molecular clues of how
GA regulates defense responses.
Three alleles of eui mutations (eui-1 and the wild-type ZS97,
eui-3 and the wild-type ZH11, eui-4 and the wild-type
02428), the RNAi lines S73 and S74 (Zhang et al., 2008) and
overexpression lines OX-7, OX-11, OX-15, OX-21, OX-24, OX-
39, and OX-47 (Zhu et al., 2006) and the wild-type TP309 were
used in the study.
Pathogen Inoculation and Disease Index
For Xoo resistance assays, rice plants were planted in an iso-
lated paddy field. Three independent inoculation experiments
ippine race 6 (PXO99A) and Korea race 1 (DY89031) were used
for inoculation. Bacteria were incubated on a potato-agar me-
dium at 28?C for 3 d. Inoculum was prepared by suspending
the bacterial mass in sterilized water at a concentration of
OD600 = 1.0. Lesion length was recorded at 14 dpi. Bacterial
growth was record for PXO99A.
For M. oryzae resistance, rice seedlings were planted in
greenhouses at a temperature of 28?C/24?C (day/night). The
strain of blast CH14 (ZB1) was used in the experiments.
Two-week-old seedlings were spray-inoculated with spore sus-
pensions (1 3 105spores ml?1) in a dew growth chamber for
24 h in darkness at 26?C, and were subsequently kept at 12 h/
12 h(day/night),26?Cand90%relativehumidityfor5 d.Then,
lesion types on leaves were scored from 0 (resistant) to 5 (sus-
with the criterion of disease severity: grade 0, no visible lesion;
grade 1, diseased lesion diameter smaller than 0.5 mm, yellow
brink; grade 2, diseased lesion 0.5–1.0 mm in diameter, black-
brown brink; grade 3, diseased lesion 1.0–1.5 mm in diameter,
yellow-brown brink; grade 4, diseased lesion 1.5–2.0 mm in di-
ameter, water soaking, gray or brown blink; grade 5, diseased
lesion much morethan 2.0 mm in diameter or cover across two
small leaf veins.
Statistical analysis was performed for Xoo and M. oryzae
disease index with large sample size (.50 leaves for each in-
DNA Extraction and Southern Hybridization
Total DNA of rice with fungal mycelia was extracted according
to the method described previously (Qi and Yang, 2002).
Briefly, infected rice leaves were grounded with liquid nitro-
gen and transferred into extraction buffer (0.3 M NaCl,
50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 20 mM EDTA, 2% sarkosyl, 0.5% so-
dium dodecylsulfate, 5 M urea, and 5% Phenol), followed
by the extraction by phenol/chloroform solution (pH 8.0).
After centrifugation, the supernatants were precipitated
with 0.7 volume of isopropanol by centrifugation for 5 min
534 | Yang et al.
dGibberellin Regulates Disease Resistance
by guest on June 9, 2013
at 12 000 rpm. After being washed with 70% ethanol,
the resultant DNA samples were dissolved in Tris-EDTA (TE)
buffer containing RNase. DNA (20 lg) was transferred to
Hybond-N+membranes (Amersham) for Southern blot. A
330-bp fragment of M. oryzae 28S rDNA was amplified
from fungal genomic DNA using the primers 5#–TACGA-
GAGGAACCGCTCATTCAGATAATTA–3’ and 5#–TCAGCAGATC-
GTAACGATAAAGCTACTC–3#, as described previously (Qi and
Yang., 2002), and labelled with [a-32P] dCTP using a ran-
dom primer labeling kit (TaKaRa) for hybridization and
RNA Extraction and Reverse PCR
at different inoculation times. Reverse transcription–PCR (RT–
PCR) was conducted using SuperScript III First-Strand Synthesis
System (Invitrogen). Primers used in semi-quantitative PCR are
GA20ox2F: 5#–CGCACGGGTTCTTCCAGGTGTC–3#; GA20ox2R:
5#–CTCCAGGAGTTCCATGATCGTCAGC–3#; GA2ox1F: 5#–CGAG-
CAAACGATGTGGAAGGGCTACAGG–3#; GA2ox1R: 5#–TGGCTC-
PR1aF: 5#–AGTTCGTCGAGCAGGTTATCCT–3#; PR1aR: 5#–AGAT-
TGGCCGACGAAGTTG–3#; PR1bF: 5#–TATCCAAGCTGGCCATTG-
CTTT–3#; PR1bR: 5#–TAAGGCCTCTGTCCGACGAA–3#; PR10F:
5#–TGTGGAAGGTCTGCTTGGA–3#; PR10R: 5#–CACTCGTGAAG-
CAAAAACACA–3#; ActinF: 5#–GTACCCGCATCAGGCATCTG –3#;
ActinR: 5#–TCCATCTTGGCATCTCTCAG –3#.
SA and JA Assay
plants grown in a growth chamber at 28?C/22?C and 16 h/8 h
(day/night), and measured as described previously (Zhang
et al., 2007). For JA assay, 2-week-old rice leaves were har-
vested. JA was analyzed by gas chromatography–mass
spectrometry (GC–MS) with the labeled internal standard
D3-JA, as described previously (Lou and Baldwin, 2003), and
JA levels were determined with three biological repeats.
Data are available at Molecular Plant
Foundation of China (30730064 and 30721061).
We thankW. Tangfor criticalreadingof themanuscript.Noconflict
of interest declared.
Adie, B.A., Perez-Perez, J., Perez-Perez, M.M., Godoy, M., Sanchez-
Serrano, J.J., Schmelz, E.A., and Solano, R. (2007). ABA is an
essential signal for plant resistance to pathogens affecting JA
biosynthesis and the activation of defenses in Arabidopsis. Plant
Cell 19, 1665–1681.
Bessire, M., Chassot, C., Jacquat, A.C., Humphry, M., Borel, S.,
Pete ´tot, J.M., Me ´traux, J.P., and Nawrath, C. (2007). A permeable
cuticle in Arabidopsis leads to a strong resistance to Botrytis cin-
erea. EMBO J. 26, 21.
Biemelt, S., Tschiersch, H., and Sonnewald, U. (2004). Impact of al-
tered gibberellin metabolism on biomass accumulation, lignin
biosynthesis, and photosynthesis in transgenic tobacco plants.
Plant Physiol. 135, 254–265.
Bonman, J.M., VergelDe Dios, T.I., and Khin, M.M. (1986). Physio-
logical specialization of Pyricularia oryzae in the Philippines.
Plant Dis. 70, 767–769.
Bowling, S.A., Guo, A., Cao, H., Gordon, A.S., Klessig, D.F., and
Dong, X. (1994). A mutation in Arabidopsis that leads to consti-
tutive expression of systemic acquired resistance. Plant Cell 6,
Tschaplinski, T.J., and Strauss, S.H. (2006). Transgenic modifica-
tion of gai or rgl1 causes dwarfing and alters gibberellins, root
growth,and metaboliteprofiles in Populus.Planta 224,288–299.
V., Meilan,R.,Pearce, D.W.,Rood, S.B.,Ma, C.,
Byrne, M.E., Barley, R., Curtis, M., Arroyo, J.M., Dunham, M.,
Hudson, A., and Martienssen, R.A. (2000). Asymmetric leaves1
mediates leaf patterning and stem cell function in Arabidopsis.
Nature 408, 967–971.
Chen, Z., Agnew, J.L., Cohen, J.D., He, P., Shan, L., Sheen, J., and
Kunkel, B.N. (2007). Pseudomonas syringae type III effector
AvrRpt2 alters Arabidopsis thaliana auxin physiology. Proc. Natl
Acad. Sci. U S A 104, 20131–21136.
Chen, Z., Iyer, S., Caplan, A., Klessig, D.F., and Fan, B. (1997). Differ-
ential accumulation of salicylic acid and salicylic acid-sensitive
catalase in different rice tissues. Plant Physiol. 114, 193–201.
Nu ¨rnberger, T., Jones, J.D., Felix, G., and Boller, T. (2007).
A flagellin-induced complex of the receptor FLS2 and BAK1 ini-
tiates plant defence. Nature 448, 497–500.
D., Zipfel,C., Robatzek, S.,Kemmerling, B.,
de Torres-Zabala, M., Truman, W., Bennett, M.H., Lafforgue, G.,
Mansfield, J.W., Rodriguez, Egea, P., Bo ¨gre, L., and Grant, M.
(2007). Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato hijacks the Arabidop-
sis abscisic acid signalling pathway to cause disease. EMBO J 26,
He, K., Gou, X., Yuan, T., Lin, H., Asami, T., Yoshida, S., Russell, S.D.,
and Li, J. (2007). BAK1 and BKK1 regulate brassinosteroid-
dependent growth and brassinosteroid-independent cell-death
pathways. Curr. Biol. 17, 1109–1115.
Heese, A., Hann, D.R., Gimenez-Ibanez, S., Jones, A.M., He, K., Li, J.,
Schroeder, J.I., Peck, S.C., and Rathjen, J.P. (2007). The receptor-
like kinase SERK3/BAK1 is a central regulator of innate immunity
in plants. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U S A 104, 12217–12222.
Herna ´ndez-Blanco, C., et al. (2007). Impairment of cellulose syn-
thases required for Arabidopsis secondary cell wall formation
enhances disease resistance. Plant Cell 19, 890–903.
Yang et al.
dGibberellin Regulates Disease Resistance | 535
by guest on June 9, 2013
Ichimura, K., Casais, C., Peck, S.C., Shinozaki, K., and Shirasu, K.
(2006). MEKK1 is required for MPK4 activation and regulates tis-
sue-specific and temperature-dependent cell death in Arabidop-
sis. J. Biol. Chem. 281, 36969–36976.
Futsuhara, Y., Matsuoka, M., and Yamaguchi, J. (2001). slender
rice, a constitutive gibberellin response mutant, is caused by
a null mutation of the SLR1 gene, an ortholog of the height-
regulating gene GAI/RGA/RHT/D8. Plant Cell 13, 999–1010.
Jirage, D., Zhou, N., Cooper, B., Clarke, J.D., Dong, X., and
Glazebrook, J. (2001). Constitutive salicylic acid-dependent
signaling in cpr1 and cpr6 mutants requires PAD4. Plant J. 26,
Kemmerling, B., et al. (2007). The BRI1-associated kinase 1, BAK1,
has a brassinolide-independent role in plant cell-death control.
Curr. Biol. 17, 1116–1122.
Kloek, A.P., Verbsky, M.L., Sharma, S.B., Schoelz, J.E., Vogel, J.,
syringae conferred by an Arabidopsis thaliana coronatine-
insensitive (coi1) mutation occurs through two distinct mecha-
nisms. Plant J. 26, 509–522.
Li, J., Brader, G., and Palva, E.T. (2004). The WRKY70 transcription
factor: a node of convergence for jasmonate-mediated and
salicylate-mediated signals in plant defense. Plant Cell 16,
Lou, Y., and Baldwin, I.T. (2003). Manduca sexta recognition and
resistance among allopolyploid Nicotiana host plants. Proc. Natl
Acad. Sci. U S A 100, 14581–14586.
Mauch-Mani, B., and Mauch, F. (2005). The role of abscisic acid in
plant–pathogen interactions. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 8, 409–414.
sion of a rice allene oxide synthase gene increases the endoge-
nous jasmonic acid level, PR gene expression, and host resistance
to fungal infection. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact 19, 1127–1137.
Melotto, M., Underwood, W., Koczan, J., Nomura, K., and He, S.Y.
(2006). Plant stomata function in innate immunity against bac-
terial invasion. Cell 126, 969–980.
Nagpal, P., Walker, L.M., Young, J.C., Sonawala, A., Timpte, C.,
Estelle, M., and Reed, J.W. (2000). AXR2 encodes a member of
the Aux/IAA protein family. Plant Physiol. 123, 563–574.
Nakashita, H., Yasuda, M., Nitta, T., Asami, T., Fujioka, S., Arai, Y.,
Brassinosteroid functions in a broad range of disease resistance
in tobacco and rice. Plant J 33, 887–898.
Navarro, L., Dunoyer, P., Jay, F., Arnold, B., Dharmasiri, N.,
Estelle, M., Voinnet, O., and Jones, J.D. (2006). A plant miRNA
ing. Science 312, 436–439.
Nishimura, M.T., Stein, M., Hou, B.H., Vogel, J.P., Edwards, H., and
Somerville, S.C. (2003). Loss of a callose synthase results in sali-
cylic acid-dependent disease resistance. Science 301, 969–972.
Nurmberg, P.L., Knox, K.A., Yun, B.W., Morris, P.C., Shafiei, R.,
Hudson, A., and Loake, G.J. (2007). The developmental selector
AS1 is an evolutionarily conserved regulator of the plant im-
mune response. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U S A 104, 18795–18800.
Peng, J., et al. (1999). ‘Green revolution’ genes encode mutant
gibberellin response modulators. Nature 400, 256–261.
Petersen, M., et al. (2000). Arabidopsis map kinase 4 negatively
regulates systemic acquired resistance. Cell 103, 1111–1120.
Purrington, C.B. (2000). Costs of resistance. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 3,
Qi, M., and Yang, Y. (2002). Quantification of Magnaporthe grisea
during infection of rice plants using real-time polymerase chain
reaction and northern blot/phosphoimaging analyses. Phytopa-
thology 92, 870–876.
Robert-Seilaniantz, A., Navarro, L., Bari, R., and Jones, J.D. (2007).
Pathological hormone imbalances. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 10,
Sasaki, A., et al. (2002). Green revolution: a mutant gibberellin-
synthesis gene in rice. Nature 416, 701–702.
Siemens, J., Keller, I., Sarx, J., Kunz, S., Schuller, A., Nagel, W.,
Schmu ¨lling, T., Parniske, M., and Ludwig-Mu ¨ller, J. (2006). Tran-
scriptome analysis of Arabidopsis clubroots indicate a key role
for cytokinins in disease development. Mol. Plant Microbe Inter-
act 19, 480–494.
Raskin, I. (1995). Salicylic acid in rice (biosynthesis, conjugation,
and possible Role). Plant Physiol. 108, 633–639.
Spoel, S.H., et al. (2003). NPR1 modulates cross-talk between salic-
ylate- and jasmonate-dependent defense pathways through
a novel function in the cytosol. Plant Cell 15, 760–770.
Thomma, B.P., Eggermont, K., Penninckx, I.A., Mauch-Mani, B.,
Vogelsang, R., Cammue, B.P., and Broekaert, W.F. (1998). Separate
pathways in Arabidopsis are essential for resistance to distinct
microbial pathogens. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. U S A 95, 15107–15111.
Vogel, J.P., Raab, T.K., Somerville, C.R., and Somerville, S.C. (2004).
Mutations in PMR5 result in powdery mildew resistance and
altered cell wall composition. Plant J. 40, 968–978.
Salicylic acid inhibits pathogen growth in plants through repres-
sion of the auxin signaling pathway. Curr. Biol. 17, 1784–1790.
Wang, H., Ngwenyama, N., Liu, Y., Walker, J.C., and Zhang, S.
(2007b). Stomatal development and patterning are regulated
kinases in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 19, 63–73.
Xu, Y.H., Zhu, Y.Y., Zhou, H.C., Li, Q., Sun, Z.X., Liu, Y.G., Lin, H.X.,
and He, Z.H. (2004). Identification of a 98-kb DNA segment
containing the rice Eui gene controlling uppermost internode
elongation, and construction of a TAC transgene sublibrary.
Mol. Genet. Genomics 272, 149–155.
Yabuta, T., and Sumiki, Y. (1938). On the crystal of gibberellin, a sub-
Yang, S., and Hua, J. (2004). A haplotype-specific resistance gene
regulated byBONZAI1 mediates
growth control in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 16, 1060–1067.
Yang, Y., Qi, M., and Mei, C. (2004). Endogenous salicylic acid pro-
tects rice plants from oxidative damage caused by aging as well
as biotic and abiotic stress. Plant J. 40, 909–919.
Yuan, Y., Zhong, S., Li, Q., Zhu, Z., Lou, Y., Wang, L., Wang, J.,
Wang, M., Li, Q., Yang, D., and He, Z. (2007). Functional analysis
536 | Yang et al.
dGibberellin Regulates Disease Resistance
by guest on June 9, 2013
logue conferring disease resistance with enhanced herbivore
susceptibility. Plant Biotechnol. J. 5, 313–324.
Zhang, Y., Goritschnig, S., Dong, X., and Li, X. (2003). A gain-of-
function mutation in a plant disease resistance gene leads to
in suppressor of npr1-1, constitutive 1. Plant Cell 15, 2636–2646.
Zhang, Y., Zhu, Y., Peng, Y., Yan, D., Li, Q., Wang, J., Wang, L., and
He, Z. (2008). Gibberellin homeostasis and plant height control
by EUI and a role for gibberellin in root gravity responses in rice.
Cell Research 18, 412–421.
Zhang, Z., Li, Q., Li, Z., Staswick, P.E., Wang, M., Zhu, Y., and He, Z.
(2007). Dual regulation role of GH3.5 in salicylic acid and auxin
signaling during Arabidopsis–Pseudomonas syringae interac-
tion. Plant Physiol. 145, 450–464.
Zhu, S., Gao, F., Cao, X., Chen, M., Ye, G., Wei, C., and Li, Y. (2005).
The rice dwarf virus P2 protein interacts with ent–kaurene
oxidases in vivo, leading to reduced biosynthesis of gibberellins
and rice dwarf symptoms. Plant Physiol. 139, 1935–1945.
Zhu, Y., et al. (2006). ELONGATEDUPPERMOSTINTERNODE encodes
a cytochrome P450 monooxygenase that epoxidizes gibberellins
in a novel deactivation reaction in rice. Plant Cell 18, 442–456.
Yang et al.
dGibberellin Regulates Disease Resistance | 537
by guest on June 9, 2013