Implication des protéines WHIRLY dans la biogénèse du chloroplaste en association avec la protéine SIG6

The autotrophic lifestyle of plants relies entirely on the integrity of chloroplasts and particularly on their biogenesis. Chloroplast gene transcription, performed by a Plastid-Encoded Polymerase (PEP) and two Nuclear-Encoded Polymerases (NEPs), is one of the key steps during the development of photosynthetic chloroplast. There are 3 classes of genes, one transcribed by PEP alone (class I), one by both PEP and NEPs (class II), and the third by NEPs alone (class III). To carry out transcription, PEP associates with plastid sigma factors including the general sigma factor SIG6. sig6 mutants have a pale cotyledon phenotype, a severe decrease in class I gene transcription and a reduction in the level of class I proteins. In our laboratory, we study the role of the two plastid WIHRLY proteins (WHY1 and WHY3) in maintaining plastid genome stability. However, little is known about any role these proteins may play in transcription or chloroplast biogenesis. It seems likely they are involved in plastid gene transcription since they are found in the Plastid Transcriptionally Active Chromosome (PTAC). Moreover, they have been implicated in chloroplast biogenesis in maize. In this study, we verified the implication of these proteins in plastid biogenesis using a genetic approach in which we crossed a sig6 mutant with a why1why3 mutant. We isolated sig6why1 and sig6why3 double mutants and a sig6why1why3 triple mutant. Using a phenotypic characterisation and quantification of some plastid proteins, we show that loss of one of the two Why genes complements the sig6 pale cotyledon phenotype and allows a more normal pattern of expression of plastid proteins that are under-expressed in the sig6 mutant. However, we also show that loss of the two Why genes does not alleviate the sig6 phenotype. Moreover, the triple mutant shows a second pale phenotype on true leaves, and the plastid protein expression pattern is abnormal compared to either sig6 or wild type plants. Those results cannot be explained by the role of WHIRLY proteins in plastid genome stability since the triple mutant shows fewer plastid genome rearrangements than the why1why3 mutant. Finally, we show that inhibition of the PEP polymerase using rifampicin elicits the same complementation of the sig6 phenotype as the loss of one of the two WHIRLY. Together, these results show the implication of WHIRLY proteins in plastid biogenesis in association with SIG6. We propose a model in which WHIRLY act as activators of PEP activity, particularly during the chloroplast biogenesis. Therefore, the absence of one of the WHIRLY would cause a weak inhibition of PEP, facilitating the set-up of a rescue mechanism by NEPs and, consequently, allowing the complementation of plastid biogenesis in the sig6 mutant. However, the absence of the two WHIRLY proteins would cause a strong inhibition of PEP, and the inability of the rescue mechanism by NEPs to compensate for this strong inhibition, resulting in a more severe phenotype in the sig6 mutant.

Keyphrases: Sig6, Whirly, Transcription, PEP, Chloroplast, Plastid biogenesis, Rifampicin