↓ Skip to main content

Animal NLRs provide structural insights into plant NLR function

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Botany, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
24 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
93 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
139 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Animal NLRs provide structural insights into plant NLR function
Published in
Annals of Botany, August 2016
DOI 10.1093/aob/mcw171
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam Bentham, Hayden Burdett, Peter A. Anderson, Simon J. Williams, Bostjan Kobe

Abstract

The plant immune system employs intracellular NLRs (nucleotide binding [NB], leucine-rich repeat [LRR]/nucleotide-binding oligomerization domain [NOD]-like receptors) to detect effector proteins secreted into the plant cell by potential pathogens. Activated plant NLRs trigger a range of immune responses, collectively known as the hypersensitive response (HR), which culminates in death of the infected cell. Plant NLRs show structural and functional resemblance to animal NLRs involved in inflammatory and innate immune responses. Therefore, knowledge of the activation and regulation of animal NLRs can help us understand the mechanism of action of plant NLRs, and vice versa. This review provides an overview of the innate immune pathways in plants and animals, focusing on the available structural and biochemical information available for both plant and animal NLRs. We highlight the gap in knowledge between the animal and plant systems, in particular the lack of structural information for plant NLRs, with crystal structures only available for the N-terminal domains of plant NLRs and an integrated decoy domain, in contrast to the more complete structures available for animal NLRs. We assess the similarities and differences between plant and animal NLRs, and use the structural information on the animal NLR pair NAIP/NLRC4 to derive a plausible model for plant NLR activation. Signalling by cooperative assembly formation (SCAF) appears to operate in most innate immunity pathways, including plant and animal NLRs. Our proposed model of plant NLR activation includes three key steps: (1) initially, the NLR exists in an inactive auto-inhibited state; (2) a combination of binding by activating elicitor and ATP leads to a structural rearrangement of the NLR; and (3) signalling occurs through cooperative assembly of the resistosome. Further studies, structural and biochemical in particular, will be required to provide additional evidence for the different features of this model and shed light on the many existing variations, e.g. helper NLRs and NLRs containing integrated decoys.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 139 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 138 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 24%
Researcher 24 17%
Student > Master 14 10%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Other 25 18%
Unknown 22 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 69 50%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 34 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 1%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 <1%
Other 5 4%
Unknown 23 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 March 2018.
All research outputs
#1,660,231
of 23,630,563 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Botany
#328
of 3,531 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,803
of 342,395 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Botany
#13
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,630,563 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,531 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 342,395 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.