Skip to main content
. 2015 Aug 3;6:599. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2015.00599

FIGURE 5.

FIGURE 5

SA treatment interferes with XopJ’s ability to suppress proteasome activity in a NPR1-dependent manner. (A) XopJ along with an EV control were transiently expressed in leaves of TRV:GFPsil and TRV:NPR1 leaves using Agro-infiltration. After 48 h, leaves were sprayed with 5 mM SA and relative proteasome activity in total protein extracts was determined at 0 and 6 h post SA treatment by monitoring the breakdown of the fluorogenic peptide Suc-LLVY-AMC. The EV control was set to 100%. Data represent the mean SD (n = 3). The asterisk indicates a significant difference (*P < 0.05; **P < 0.01) based on results of a Student’s t-test. (B) VIGS NPR1 and GFPsil control leaves were sprayed with 5 mM SA and proteasome activity in total leaf extracts was determined at time points indicated in the figure by monitoring the breakdown of the fluorogenic peptide Suc-LLVY-AMC. Data represent the mean SD (n = 3) Significant differences are indicated by asterisks (*P < 0.05; **P < 0.01) and were calculated using Student’s t-test. (ns = not significant). The experiment has repeated three times with similar results.