Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35620914›Full record

ArticleThe EMBO journal2022

A bacterial effector counteracts host autophagy by promoting degradation of an autophagy component.

Jia Xuan Leong, Margot Raffeiner, Daniela Spinti, Gautier Langin, Mirita Franz-Wachtel, Andrew R Guzman, Jung-Gun Kim, Pooja Pandey, Alyona E Minina, Boris Macek and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The EMBO journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. An In Vitro Ubiquitination Assay to Study Phytoplasmal Effector Function.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Autophagy and Bacterial infections.Autophagy reports · 2025
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Jia Xuan LeongCenter for Plant Molecular Biology (ZMBP), University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6016-1445
Margot RaffeinerLeibniz-Institute of Vegetable and Ornamental Crops (IGZ), Großbeeren, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3042-8254
Daniela SpintiLeibniz-Institute of Vegetable and Ornamental Crops (IGZ), Großbeeren, Germany.
Gautier LanginCenter for Plant Molecular Biology (ZMBP), University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Mirita Franz-WachtelInterfaculty Institute for Cell Biology, Department of Quantitative Proteomics, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Andrew R GuzmanDepartment of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Jung-Gun KimDepartment of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Pooja PandeyDepartment of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Alyona E MininaDepartment of Molecular Sciences, Uppsala BioCenter, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences and Linnean Center for Plant Biology, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-2619-1859
Boris MacekInterfaculty Institute for Cell Biology, Department of Quantitative Proteomics, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1206-2458
Anders HafrénDepartment of Plant Biology, Uppsala BioCenter, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences and Linnean Center for Plant Biology, Uppsala, Sweden.
Tolga O BozkurtDepartment of Life Sciences, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0507-6875
Mary Beth MudgettDepartment of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0570-2776
Frederik BörnkeLeibniz-Institute of Vegetable and Ornamental Crops (IGZ), Großbeeren, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3558-0482
Daniel HofiusDepartment of Plant Biology, Uppsala BioCenter, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences and Linnean Center for Plant Biology, Uppsala, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-4854-9946
Suayib ÜstünCenter for Plant Molecular Biology (ZMBP), University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8049-296X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Beyond its role in cellular homeostasis, autophagy plays anti- and promicrobial roles in host-microbe interactions, both in animals and plants. One prominent role of antimicrobial autophagy is to degrade intracellular pathogens or microbial molecules, in a process termed xenophagy. Consequently, microbes evolved mechanisms to hijack or modulate autophagy to escape elimination. Although well-described in animals, the extent to which xenophagy contributes to plant-bacteria interactions remains unknown. Here, we provide evidence that Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria (Xcv) suppresses host autophagy by utilizing type-III effector XopL. XopL interacts with and degrades the autophagy component SH3P2 via its E3 ligase activity to promote infection. Intriguingly, XopL is targeted for degradation by defense-related selective autophagy mediated by NBR1/Joka2, revealing a complex antagonistic interplay between XopL and the host autophagy machinery. Our results implicate plant antimicrobial autophagy in the depletion of a bacterial virulence factor and unravel an unprecedented pathogen strategy to counteract defense-related autophagy in plant-bacteria interactions.

Indexed as

Plant DiseasesVirulence FactorsAnimalsAutophagyBacteriaHost-Pathogen InteractionsVirulence Factorsautophagyeffectorsimmunityubiquitinationxenophagy

Identifiers

PMID35620914
PMCPMC9251887

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.