Sulfate is Incorporated into Cysteine to Trigger ABA Production and Stomatal Closure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plants close stomata when root water availability becomes limiting. Recent studies have demonstrated that soil-drying induces root-to-shoot sulfate transport via the xylem and that sulfate closes stomata. Here we provide evidence for a physiologically relevant signaling pathway that underlies sulfate-induced stomatal closure in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana). We uncovered that, in the guard cells, sulfate activates NADPH oxidases to produce reactive oxygen species (ROS) and that this ROS induction is essential for sulfate-induced stomata closure. In line with the function of ROS as the second-messenger of abscisic acid (ABA) signaling, sulfate does not induce ROS in the ABA-synthesis mutant, aba3-1, and sulfate-induced ROS were ineffective at closing stomata in the ABA-insensitive mutant abi2-1 and a SLOW ANION CHANNEL1 loss-of-function mutant. We provided direct evidence for sulfate-induced accumulation of ABA in the cytosol of guard cells by application of the ABAleon2.1 ABA sensor, the ABA signaling reporter ProRAB18:GFP, and quantification of endogenous ABA marker genes. In concordance with previous studies, showing that ABA DEFICIENT3 uses Cys as the substrate for activation of the ABSCISIC ALDEHYDE OXIDASE3 (AAO3) enzyme catalyzing the last step of ABA production, we demonstrated that assimilation of sulfate into Cys is necessary for sulfate-induced stomatal closure and that sulfate-feeding or Cys-feeding induces transcription of NINE-CIS-EPOXYCAROTENOID DIOXYGENASE3, limiting the synthesis of the AAO3 substrate. Consequently, Cys synthesis-depleted mutants are sensitive to soil-drying due to enhanced water loss. Our data demonstrate that sulfate is incorporated into Cys and tunes ABA biosynthesis in leaves, promoting stomatal closure, and that this mechanism contributes to the physiological water limitation response.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".