Why Does Herbivore Attack Reconfigure Primary Metabolism?

A plant's resistance to herbivore attack is thought to be principally determined by its secondary metabolism, which can be remarkably plastic and responsive to different grades and types of herbivory. Newer unbiased “omic” approaches, which characterize transcriptomic, metabolomic, and proteomic changes in herbivore-attacked plants, have laid to rest the notion that metabolism can be neatly parsed into “secondary metabolism,” which functions to meet environmental challenges, and “primary metabolism,” which supports growth. The hundreds of genes regulated during the plant-herbivore or -pathogen interaction have been analyzed with microarray studies, and almost all aspects of metabolism are represented, with a substantial fraction coming from primary metabolism (Hui et al., 2003; Both et al., 2005; Major and Constabel, 2006; Mozoruk et al., 2006; Ralph et al., 2006; Schmidt and Baldwin, 2006; Tian et al., 2006; Kant and Baldwin, 2007) Here, we consider four overlapping functional explanations for this reconfiguration: Dependency of resistance traits (defenses and tolerance) and primary metabolism. Primary metabolism is fueled by energy and resources, which the plant gains from its environment. Primary metabolism involves growth, storage, and reproduction. Tolerance depends on primary metabolites and energy, both of which are taken from pools for reproduction, storage, and/or growth, and later reinvested in reproduction. Defenses from secondary metabolism are based on energy and resources from primary metabolism, which can be partially resupplied to primary metabolism. Parts of primary metabolism can function as direct defense. Rather than supporting defense responses, reconfiguration could support the physiological adjustments plants must make to tolerate herbivory and reduce the negative fitness consequences of herbivore attack (Fig. 1). Resistance signaling is elicited differently from simple wounding when herbivore-specific elicitors (FACs) are introduced into wounds during caterpillar feeding. Signaling depends on primary metabolites. Herbivory induces a large reorganization of primary metabolism, including altered photosynthesis and altered sink/source relations. These changes are coordinated by a signaling network that is only partially understood. The expression of defense and tolerance traits requires changes both in primary and secondary metabolism. Induced changes in primary metabolism could themselves be defensive (Fig. 2). We consider these four hypotheses in an overview of the literature that addresses how assimilation and the partitioning of assimilates are altered by herbivory and how primary metabolites function as signals and as defenses. In conclusion, we consider the challenges that plant biologists face in attempting to falsify these hypotheses. Compared to the falsifications of hypotheses about the defensive function of secondary metabolism, tests of the above hypotheses will seriously challenge the procedures that we use to understand resistance mechanisms and perhaps even challenge the reductionist paradigm that has proved so useful for understanding gene function in much of biology in the last century. If the resource demands of defense production compete with those of growth and reproduction, and defenses are costly to produce (Steppuhn, 2007), then changes in the partitioning of resources among growth, storage, and reproduction would be expected (Fig. 1). Changes in how resources are partitioned according to function can be avoided if the rate of resource assimilation increases. Similar predictions hold for the activation of physiological changes that allow plants to better tolerate the negative fitness consequences of herbivory. Tolerance, which measures a plant's ability to compensate for the negative fitness effects of tissue damage, is usually described as a reaction norm of the fitness of specific genotypes at various damage levels (Strauss and Agrawal, 1999; Stowe et al., 2000). Tolerance is thought to result from the activation of dormant meristems, changes in plant architecture, resource allocation, or photosynthetic capacity. In short, the herbivory-induced activation of both defense and tolerance responses is predicted to alter resource assimilation and source-sink relationships, and the literature provides general support for these predictions. The photosynthetic apparatus frequently responds to herbivore attack, usually with decreases in CO2 assimilation in the attacked leaf that are proportionally greater than the leaf area that is actually damaged (Zangerl et al., 2002). Otherwise, the photosynthetic response depends on the type of attacker and the age of the tissues that are measured (Welter, 1989). Defoliating herbivores can increase the photosynthetic activity of unattacked leaves, whereas stem borers and mesophyll feeders tend to decrease activity. On the other hand, transcript levels of photosynthetically related genes are commonly down-regulated (Hui et al., 2003; Ralph et al., 2006; Tang et al., 2006). It is thought that down-regulation of the photosynthetic apparatus protects it from oxidative damage (Niyogi, 2000), but decreased photosynthetic activity may also free up resources, especially nitrogen-rich compounds, making these available for use in secondary defense pathways. Decreased photosynthetic rates may be part of a global inhibition of protein synthesis, which may anticipate the need to redirect resources to defensive functions. As decreases in photosynthetic rates are more common than increases, altered photosynthesis has only rarely been correlated with tolerance (e.g. Cullen et al., 2006). Increases in photosynthetic rates could also be caused by changes in source-sink relationships resulting from the increased demand for energy and carbon (C)-based resources that the production of defensive compounds entails; separating where and for what additional C and energy are used is difficult. The activation of dormant meristems and thus new sinks has been shown to be central in tolerance in some species (Bergelson et al., 1996; Mabry and Wayne, 1997). For example, in Nicotiana attenuata, increased branching compensates for leaf damage (Schwachtje et al., 2006), and jasmonic acid (JA) signaling, which is responsible for activating several defense responses in this species, appears to suppress regrowth and contribute to apical dominance (Zavala and Baldwin, 2006). How herbivore attack alters source-sink relationships remains unclear other than by reducing source strength when herbivores consume and damage leaves. As well as serving a variety of developmental functions, invertases are involved in the regulation of sink strength by cleaving Suc into Glc and Fru, thereby altering the osmotic gradient of Suc and leading to altered carbohydrate partitioning by turning specific tissues into metabolic sinks for carbohydrates (Roitsch and Gonzalez, 2004). Hence, invertases are often regulated after insect attack. For example, increased sink strength is elicited by JA treatment and gypsy moth feeding via the increased activity of cell wall invertases in the sink leaves of hybrid Populus deltoides × Populus nigra (Arnold and Schultz, 2002) and the wounding of leaves in Solanum lycopersicum, Solanum peruvianum, and Pisum sativum, which increases the activity of soluble (vacuolar) and cell wall invertase in damaged leaves (Zhang et al., 1996; Ohyama et al., 1998). Root wounding was shown to induce vacuolar and cell wall invertase in Beta vulgaris (Rosenkranz et al., 2001). Changes in assimilate flux after herbivore attack may occur along the transport routes, where sugar transporters are involved in Suc loading and unloading. Wounding is known to elicit a Suc transporter, AtSUC3, in sieve elements of different sink tissues (Meyer et al., 2004) and a monosaccharide transporter, STP4, in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana; Truernit et al., 1996). Tolerance to herbivore attack can be acquired by changing resource allocation when stored reserves are used (for example, those of root tissues). This strategy favors biennial or perennial species that normally accumulate reserves during their growing season for later growth during short-day periods (Wyka, 1999; Wise and Cummins, 2006). With nutrients stored in safe tissues, e.g. roots, plants have the possibility to regrow later in the growing season when the pressure from aboveground herbivores may have decreased. If plants are attacked by root herbivores, assimilates can be remobilized above ground. The highly tolerant Centaurea maculosa responds to root herbivory by the knapweed moth by reducing its nitrogen (N) uptake but also shifting N to aboveground tissues (Newingham et al., 2007), suggesting that N allocation can be a determinant of tolerance. This idea is supported by the finding that after its leaves were clipped, the dwarf shrub Indigofera spinosa increased its root N uptake (Coughenour et al., 1990) and that Quercus serrata accumulates higher N levels in leaves (Takashima et al., 2004). Moreover, N allocation to roots has been observed after methyl-JA treatment of Medicago sativa (Meuriot et al., 2004). Carbon is allocated to roots in response to leaf damage or herbivory in several species, for example, after grasshopper damage to Zea mays (Holland et al., 1996) and Panicum coloratum (Dyer et al., 1991), after the defoliation of Lolium perenne (Bazot et al., 2005) and of two C4 perennial grasses (Briske et al., 1996), and after methyl-JA treatment of Populus tremuloides (Babst et al., 2005). Recently, a SnRK kinase has been found to regulate the reallocation of photoassimilates in response to herbivory, facilitating a tolerance response (Fig. 2; Schwachtje et al., 2006). SnRK kinases are involved in regulating isoprenoid, amino acid, and especially carbohydrate metabolism (Halford and Paul, 2003). The β-subunit of the kinase complex is rapidly down-regulated in the source leaves of N. attenuata after simulated attack by the tobacco hornworm, leading to 10% more photoassimilate being partitioned to roots. The same effect was seen in JA-deficient asLOX plants, which are silenced for the JA-biosynthetic enzyme lipoxygenase, making this response demonstrably independent of JA signaling. This rapid bunkering of C into root tissues is elicited when wounds are treated with fatty acid-amino acid conjugates (FACs), which are the insect-specific elicitors that activate most defense responses via the jasmonate cascade (Halitschke et al., 2003). At the end of its growing season, N. attenuata gains a measure of tolerance by reusing its additional root resources to prolong flowering, leading to increased capsule production late in the season. Recently, wild-type Arabidopsis plants overexpressing JA were observed to have reduced fitness but the same tolerance of defoliation, which is consistent with the idea that there is a JA-independent mechanism of tolerance (Cipollini, 2007). The increased flux of C to the roots in response to herbivory would be expected to increase the rate of root growth, but in young seedlings of N. attenuata, for example, sometimes just the opposite occurs (Hummel et al., 2007). Unlike the FAC-elicited C flux, this rapid inhibition of root growth requires an intact JA-signaling cascade (G.M. Hummel, U. Schurr, I.T. Baldwin, and A. Walter, unpublished data) and may be one of the plant's anticipatory responses. Changes in growth that are anticipated in advance of resource limitations (and therefore differ from acute responses) have acquired growing importance as physiologists have shifted their focus to understanding the relationships between C balance and growth (Smith and Stitt, 2007). By studying the growth dynamics of plants unable to synthesize starch due to a mutation in plastidial phosphoglucomutase in combination with experimental conditions in which the dark cycle was extended, researchers have discovered that plants anticipate the length of the dark period and adjust their synthesis and catabolism of starch to exactly meet energy demands during the dark period (Gibon et al., 2004; Smith and Stitt, 2007). For reasons that are not completely clear, starch accumulation at the end of the dark period is inversely correlated with growth rate (Cross et al., 2006). It will be interesting to see how these anticipatory changes in allocation and resource partitioning that are likely coordinated by a plant's circadian clock are modified when plants are elicited by insect-specific elicitors. A plant's resistance response to insect feeding is coordinated by different signaling pathways that depend on primary metabolites; in addition, the integration of the different signals induced by wounding and insect-specific elicitors results in a complex rearrangement of primary and secondary metabolism (Fig. 2). JA is a crucial player in defense signaling (Devoto and Turner, 2005) and requires kinases, such as WIPK and SIPK (Wu et al., 2007), and transcription factors such as WRKYs (Hui et al., 2003). After elicitation, Ile production is amplified by Thr deaminase (TD). Two hours after elicitation, the mRNA levels of N. attenuata's TD are increased by as much as 30 times (Kang et al., 2006). The Ile that is produced at the attack site is rapidly conjugated to JA, forming JA-Ile, a key activator of defense signaling (Chini et al., 2007; Thines et al., 2007). In addition to the JA-dependent signaling, several JA-independent responses to wounding and FACs have been documented (Leon et al., 1998; Rojo et al., 1999; LeBrasseur et al., 2002; Gross et al., 2004; Schwachtje et al., 2006), but knowledge about the underlying mechanisms is limited. Recently, the signaling role of sugars has received increased attention because several sugar-induced resistance genes have been found. For example, Suc, Glc, and Fru act as specific regulatory signals on the wound-inducible expression of an extensin gene (SbHRGP3) in Glycine max (Ahn et al., 1996; Ahn and Lee, 2003); additionally, a putatively defensive vegetative storage protein is Suc as well as JA induced (Berger et al., 1995). Moreover, transcripts of a hexokinase, which can function as a sugar sensor or photosynthesis repressor (Rolland et al., 2006), are induced by wounding and are sensitive to trehalose-6-P (Claeyssen and Rivoal, 2007), which itself is involved in the feedback regulation of photosynthesis and developmental transitions (Paul, 2007; Ramon and Rolland, 2007). Trehalose and SnRK protein kinases have been shown to interact (Schluepmann et al., 2004), as have sugars and lectins, which also can be induced by JA, suggesting lectins play a role in signal transduction (Chen et al., 2002; Van Damme et al., 2003; Gabius et al., 2004; Lannoo et al., 2006). Furthermore, an antagonistic interaction between Glc and ethylene, which is involved in defense signaling (von Dahl and Baldwin, 2007), has been reported (Zhou et al., 1998). Several metabolites that play well-studied roles in primary metabolism have been found to possess defensive functions. Their dual function has been discovered because very high levels of them accumulate in plants, or because their induction patterns after herbivore attack are similar to those of defensive secondary metabolites. In the case of TD, for example, the function of the enzyme, degrading Thr, led to the hypothesis that it functioned in the insect's gut to degrade this essential amino acid. TD's regulatory domain was found to be removed by insect proteases, suppressing its negative feedback regulation by Ile (Chen et al., 2007). TD then continuously degrades Thr in the gut lumen, leading to amino acid starvation. Two TD isoforms are known in S. lycopersicum, one of which is stable in insect guts (Chen et al., 2007); in N. attenuata, in contrast, one TD serves both primary and secondary functions (Kang et al., 2006). High levels of calcium oxalate (CaOx), a primary metabolite, accumulate in plants (up to 80% of dry mass), and in some plants CaOx synthesis is induced by herbivory (Molano-Flores, 2001; Ruiz et al., 2002). CaOx regulates bulk levels of the Ca that is involved in cell signaling and in several biochemical processes. The morphologically diverse CaOx crystals are either stored in the vacuoles of specialized cells, the crystal idioblasts, or are associated with the cell wall (Franceschi and Nakata, 2005). Crystals can be located around tissues, e.g. vascular bundles, to provide a physical barrier against chewing insects by an abrasive effect that blunts insects' mandibles (Korth et al., 2006). Moreover, CaOx is thought to act as an antinutritive defense by decreasing the with which is (Korth et al., 2006). storage and lectins play dual roles in primary metabolism and and some of them are JA For a of defensive see et can also function as defenses. reduced growth of when to in of but Glc and Fru increased growth and In are by sugars et al., 2005). only after Suc is by an which is in are and a secondary a role in herbivore is determined by plants that both and not produce the into the where can be with herbivore With the of and the of genes that the and flux into secondary metabolism, it is to these plants and to their For example, and N. attenuata plants have for the defensive function of secondary for defensive among different secondary and for the role of JA signaling in activating metabolic changes et al., 2004; et al., 2004; et al., and Baldwin, 2007). The defensive metabolites of a plant have been thought to act the combination of different effects is to be more than their A defensive between and was discovered in N. attenuata when the production of or or both was and when plants were attacked by the most common herbivore in this The feeding response of this herbivore to amino acid was by the ability to tolerate and the leaf area was reduced when both secondary metabolites were and Baldwin, 2007). that acid, a primary metabolite, the of a defensive by the likely by insect et al., 2001). These results that in tests are essential for defensive function because the in which a is can how an herbivore These plants also support for the hypothesis that secondary thought to be at the play a physiological role the a gene not only increased to herbivores but also increased growth and This increase in plant not only when production was silenced but also when production was in an in production (Zavala et al., is not likely by the of resources that are in the mechanisms to be it is likely that growth their of a described signaling biology it to the defensive functions of secondary metabolites because it was to the accumulation of a secondary with simple by plant growth. of the defensive function of primary metabolites will that allow to be both tissue specific and at very the is to the growth and developmental effects of gene herbivore and resistance that the effects of gene at different levels in the signaling will be to how resources are allocated and source-sink the and for unbiased we those regulatory that are altered by herbivore attack. and will be for the of that with the plant and its will also be will need to be to use an experimental that the of in the of from to metabolite, only when the plants are to a tests will need to be in the In this will a among plant The of the function of one of N. attenuata's in resistance responses to herbivore attack the and Baldwin, 2007). are essential in but their function was plants silenced in expression were into were found to be highly to attack from herbivores, which was associated with reduced which in are known to JA signaling. that was involved in the signaling of and JA, after the a of that for genes were found and Baldwin, This the of in rapidly functions that are when plants are in was well the of have to with the of that to the resources that plants Their of themselves likely use all aspects of their metabolism. Their plants to just about at to challenge will be to what of metabolism are being by as defenses. As predicted in et al., plants are very plastic and this itself may well be part of its defensive provides the for gene we have a of plant biologists are with unbiased responses are used to the which genes are regulated in response to herbivore attack, the plant provides hypotheses about which genes are in tolerance or defense. genes and their biochemical function based on These are but be with as not other biochemical functions or functions at other of the TD gene from N. attenuata the TD plants with growth because TD is involved in Ile other plants normally but were found to be highly to herbivores (Kang et al., 2006). of these plants a of defense responses to herbivory, due to reduced levels of defense signaling was but the effects on primary metabolism were This that the defense function of a primary gene can be with that and are not in there will be much to be by the and the “omic” for the plant's in the and metabolites that it regulates differently when attacked by If we are to the gene to these regulated responses in that not growth, and then to the of herbivores that attack plants the plant is more to or tolerant of herbivore attack, we will much that is new about how plants in the at and regulatory the of this the that with specialized will be as to as the other