Abstract
Autophagy is an evolutionarily conserved vacuolar process functioning in the degradation of cellular components for reuse. In plants, autophagy is generally activated upon stress and its regulation is executed by numbers of AuTophaGy-related genes (ATGs), of which the ATG8 plays a dual role in both biogenesis of autophagosomes and recruitment of ATG8-interacting motif (AIM) anchored selective autophagy receptors (SARs). Such motif is either termed as AIM or ubiquitin-interacting motif (UIM), corresponding to the LC3-interacting region (LIR)/AIM docking site (LDS) or the UIM docking site (UDS) of ATG8, respectively. To date, dozens of AIM or UIM containing SARs have been characterized. However, the knowledge of these motifs is still obscured. In this review, we intend to summarize the current understanding of SAR proteins and discuss the conservation and diversification of the AIMs/UIMs, expectantly providing new insights into the evolution of them in various biological processes in plants.
Introduction
Being unable to move, plants are often confronted with adversely stressful conditions, including abiotic and biotic stress (Zhu, 2016). Accordingly, a set of complicated cellular and metabolic responses for survival under such severe conditions have been evolved in plant cell, of which a highly conserved mechanism (termed autophagy, meaning “self-eating”) has been developed. Autophagy facilitates the vacuole-dependent (in plants and yeast) or lysosomes-dependent (in animals) degradation of unwanted cell components, and consequently activates the recycling of cellular material to provide stress relief (). To date, three types of autophagy have been well described in plants, including macroautophagy, microautophagy, and megaautophagy. Macroautophagy is involved in the delivery of cytoplasmic constituents by double-membrane vesicles (termed autophagosomes) to the lytic vacuoles for turnover. With respect to the microautophagy, cytoplasmic components are engulfed by invagination of the tonoplast. As an extreme form of autophagy, megaautophagy functions in the last stage of developmental programmed cell death (PCD), leading to the degradation of cytoplasmic components following the permeabilization or rupture of the tonoplast and release of vacuolar hydrolases (Marshall and Vierstra, 2018). Among them, the macroautophagy (hereafter referred to autophagy) is the most well-characterized one in plants.
The autophagic process was first demonstrated by Christian de Duve and his associates with electron microscopy (EM) studies (Klionsky, 2008). Due to the limitation of research approaches, the physiological functions and molecular mechanisms of autophagy have not been fully understood until the discovery of AuTophaGy-related genes (ATGs) in yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) by Yoshinori Ohsumi in 1990s, earning him the 2016 Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine. To date, it has been revealed that ATGs function in each step of the autophagy machinery and their homologs are highly conserved in eukaryotes (Ohya et al., 1986; Mizushima et al., 2011; Yu et al., 2018). Attributing to the identification of ATGs homologs, more than 40 ATG genes were isolated among different plant species, including the Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), tomato (Solanum lycopersicum), maize (Zea mays), and rice (Oryza sativa). Characterization of plant ATGs enabled further understanding of autophagy function in various biological processes (; ; Zhou et al., 2014; Wada et al., 2015). However, the identification of selective autophagy receptors (SARs) still remains further elusive.
Autophagy Machinery in Plants
Autophagy can either selectively degrade specific cellular components or non-selectively degrade cytoplasm in bulk. In both cases, the cytoplasmic materials are devoured by a double membrane structure, namely autophagosome, which is afterward imported into vacuole for degradation. Briefly, autophagy is activated according to the nutritional and developmental status of the cell, and this induction is affected by the activity of several protein kinases, such as Target of Rapamycin (TOR) kinase. Activated TOR hyperphosphorylates the ATG1 partner, ATG13, to prevent the ATG1/ATG13 complex assembly, thereby, inhibiting autophagy. Upon TOR inactivation, dephosphorylation of ATG13 permits ATG1, ATG11, and ATG101 to form the active complex (Liu and Bassham, 2010; Suttangkakul et al., 2011; Li et al., 2014; ; Pu et al., 2017). Meanwhile, the activated ATG1 kinase stimulates the ATG9/ATG2/ATG18 complex to recruit lipids to the expanding phagophore. The phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase (PI3K) complex composed of vacuolar protein sorting 34 (VPS34), VPS15, ATG6, and ATG14 or VPS38 subunit, generates phosphatidylinositol-3-phosphate (PI3P) to decorate the expanding phagophore (Marshall and Vierstra, 2018). This decoration process is accompanied by the attachment of ATG8 to phosphatidylethanolamine (PE) regulated by ATG5/ATG12/ATG16 E3 ligase complex (Romanov et al., 2012). Once inserted into the emerging phagophore, the ATG8-PE adduct helps in sealing the vesicle to generate a mature autophagosome (Marshall and Vierstra, 2018). Subsequently, the entire autophagosome is transported to the vacuole and its outer membrane is fused with the tonoplast with the help of Fab1, YOTB/ZK632.12, Vac1, and EEA1 (FYVE) domain protein required for endosomal sorting 1 (FREE1) and other components (; Kolb et al., 2015; Kalinowska et al., 2018; Marshall and Vierstra, 2018). Finally, the autophagic body is deposited and its membrane and contents are degraded by vacuolar hydrolases, resulting in the breakdown and recycling of nutrients.
The Classification of ATG8-Interacting Proteins
In addition to the contribution to autophagosome formation mentioned above, ATG8 plays an additional key role in the selection of specific SARs to be sequestered prior to its degradation. In this process, ATG8 proteins bind to these SARs via their ATG8-interacting motifs [AIMs or LC3-interacting regions (LIRs) in animals] or ubiquitin-interacting motifs (UIMs; ; ; Marshall and Vierstra, 2018; Figures 1A,B), indicating that AIM/UIM is the core apparatus linking selective autophagy to its targets. Even though there is less conservation among these SAR proteins, a core consensus sequence consisting of W/F/Y-X-X-L/V/I regarding to AIM is identified (Figure 1A), which often prefers the surrounding of one or more acidic residues within W or L site (Xie et al., 2016). To bind to the W- and L-sites, the LC3-interacting region (LIR)/AIM docking site (LDS) of ATG8 is usually present in an extended β-conformation with exposed hydrophobic side chains (Figure 1C). If potential AIM residues are buried within the molecule, it might be incapable of interacting with ATG8 (Noda et al., 2008, 2010). As a consequence, simple identification of AIM based on this consensus sequence may bring false positive candidate, which still needs to be experimentally validated (Kalvari et al., 2014; Xie et al., 2016). To address this issue, at least two bioinformatic approaches have been developed by introducing stringent criteria (Kalvari et al., 2014; Xie et al., 2016), definitely convincing a high-throughput analysis of AIM in various organisms. With respect to the UIM, it presents in another surface of ATG8 (Marshall et al., 2019; Figure 1C). Notably, the UIM docking site (UDS) is consisted of less residues than that of LDS, Ψ-F-Ψ-Ω/T (Marshall et al., 2019), implying a less spectrum of UIM proteins. In fact, only a few of UIM-containing SARs has been identified so that it is difficult to generate a reliable regular pattern of its consensus sequences (Figure 1B and Table 1), thereby hampering the genome-wide in silico high throughout the identification of UIM.
FIGURE 1
TABLE 1
| Speciesa | Protein name (Locusb) | Patternc | PSSM Scored | Annotation | References |
| A. thaliana | DSK2(NP_565407.1) | ESFKEL | 10 | Degradation of brassinosteroid-responsive transcription factor BES1 | Zhao et al., 2002; |
| EGFNML | 10 | ||||
| RMYENV | 10 | ||||
| ABS3(NP_194643.1) | RGWAPL | 15 | Encodes Activated Disease Susceptibility 1 | Wang et al., 2015; Jia et al., 2019 | |
| GLWVGL | 12 | ||||
| RGS1(NP_189238.2) | SDYVAV | 16 | Unknown | ||
| KSYIFL | 12 | ||||
| SFWIPV | 12 | ||||
| DLWKGI | 12 | ||||
| ISWLQV | 13 | ||||
| DYWSSI | 14 | ||||
| GLK1(NP_565476.1) | IDFDDI | 13 | Unknown | ||
| RPWLPL | 15 | ||||
| KIN7.4(NP_195616.2) | DEYDGV | 13 | Unknown | ||
| DKFDSL | 12 | ||||
| NMWVLV | 16 | ||||
| GLT1(NP_850828.1) | AGWFDL | 14 | Unknown | ||
| FTWKAL | 16 | ||||
| COILIN(NP_172762.2) | RSWVVL | 20 | Unknown | Kanno et al., 2020; Zheng et al., 2020 | |
| IDYEQL | 13 | ||||
| SPWEEL | 17 | ||||
| NTR1(NP_173150.1) | ETWETL | 20 | Encodes a homolog of spliceosome disassembly factor NTR1. Required for correct expression and splicing of DOG1, a regulator of seed dormancy. The mRNA is cell-to-cell mobile. | Thieme et al., 2016; Wang et al., 2019 | |
| QGWDPL | 17 | ||||
| SSWRKL | 15 | ||||
| HPWLPI | 12 | ||||
| SPWKTV | 13 | ||||
| TSWEQL | 16 | ||||
| PKWLDV | 14 | ||||
| YGWKEL | 14 | ||||
| GGWFLV | 13 | ||||
| PTR2(NP_178313.1) | IIWVPL | 12 | Unknown | ||
| SUC3(NP_973404.1) | GPWDQL | 14 | Unknown | ||
| CCI1(NP_201351.1) | GGFVVL | 12 | Unknown | ||
| O. sativa | DSK2a(XP_015614223.1) | RMYETV | 13 | Unknown | Wang et al., 2020 |
| EGFNML | 10 | ||||
| ABS3(ABF94773.1) | RGYVPI | 13 | Unknown | Qin et al., 2021 | |
| RGWPAL | 14 | ||||
| RGS1(NA) | NA | NA | Unknown | In this study | |
| GLK1(BAD37323.1) | EGYDAV | 12 | Unknown | ||
| RLWSLL | 12 | ||||
| KIN7.4(BAS96703.1) | NMWTVL | 17 | Unknown | In this study | |
| GLT1(BAS70238.1) | AGWLDL | 17 | Unknown | In this study | |
| FTWKAL | 16 | ||||
| COILIN(BAT16766.1) | RCWLLL | 14 | Unknown | In this study | |
| NTR1(BAS90051.1) | DEFVTV | 15 | Unknown | In this study | |
| PTR2(BAS86116.1) | STFDVV | 12 | Unknown | Jie et al., 2010; Léran et al., 2014 | |
| RGFTEL | 12 | ||||
| IIWVPL | 12 | Unknown | |||
| SUC3(BAS82530.1) | SAWAAV | 11 | Unknown | ||
| CCI1(BAT05425.1) | GSFAVL | 8 | Unknown | In this study |
Known ATG8-interacting proteins in plant.
aA. thaliana, Arabidopsis thaliana; O. sativa, Oryza sativa.
bGene Locus of the each protein is derived from TAIR (https://www.Arabidopsis.org/index.jsp) and China Rice Data Center (http://www.ricedata.cn/gene/).
cPattern of the AIM is predicted by the iLIR online tool (https://ilir.warwick.ac.uk/index.php).
dPosition Specific Scoring Matrix (PSSM) is a commonly used representation of motifs or patterns.
The experimentally verified ATG8-interacting proteins can be mainly divided into four groups according to their predicted or known functions in the autophagic processes. The first group is referred to the autophagic proteins ATG1, ATG3, ATG4, and ATG7, which can directly regulate ATG8 during its lipidation with PE. ATG1 kinase complex, including the ATG13 and ATG101 regulatory subunits and the ATG11 scaffold protein, is involved in the regulation of the initiation of the preautophagosomal structure (PAS) formation. Both ATG1 and ATG11 directly bind ATG8 through the AIM REYVLV in ATG1a, and DNFDDI and CEYFIV in ATG11, respectively (Li et al., 2014). These interactions may not only stimulate the direct PAS assembly but also promote its autophagic turnover in which the ATG1a is delivered to the vacuole with ATG8-decorated autophagic bodies (Suttangkakul et al., 2011; Kraft et al., 2012; Li et al., 2014). Notably, the presence of ATG11 promotes starvation-induced phosphorylation of ATG1 and turnover of ATG1 and ATG13. Therefore, it is presumed that the breakdown of ATG1 kinase complex leads to the suppression of starvation-induced autophagy by removing this central regulator (Suttangkakul et al., 2011; Li et al., 2014). Cysteine proteinase ATG4 is mostly involved in the processing and delipidation of ubiquitin-like ATG8 proteins. Two homologs of the yeast ATG4 gene have been identified in Arabidopsis, the AtATG4a and AtATG4b. Among them, AtATG4b has been experimentally validated to interact with two AtATG8 isoforms, AtATG8a and AtATG8d. Recent studies showed that AtATG4a and AtATG4b have different enzyme activity and exhibit different substrate affinity. AtATG4a predominantly cleaves AtATG8a, AtATG8c, AtATG8d, and AtATG8i, whereas other AtATG8 isoforms are processed by AtATG4a/b with similar efficiency. However, atatg4a is more sensitive to H2O2 than atatg4b under high H2O2 concentration, suggesting that plant might use AtATG4b to activate autophagy in response to oxidative stress (Ketelaar et al., 2004; Yoshimoto et al., 2004; Park et al., 2014; Woo et al., 2014).
The second group of ATG8-interacting proteins includes the Bin/Amphiphysin/Rvs (BAR) domain- and Src homology-3 (SH3) domain-containing family proteins that are involved in stimulating the development and closure of phagophore during autophagosome maturation (
The third group of ATG8-interacting proteins is represented by the FYVE and coiled coil domain containing adaptor proteins 1 (FYCO1) (Pankiv and Johansen, 2010). FYCO1 proteins have been shown to interact with ATG8 and PI3P on autophagosomes, as well as with RAB7 Ras-bound GTPases to translocate autophagosomes (Pankiv et al., 2010). Nine FYCO1 homologs have been identified in Arabidopsis (Wywial and Singh, 2010), but it is still unknown whether other homologs are also involved in autophagosome transport in plants.
The last group of ATG8-interacting proteins is briefly referred to as the SARs, which participate in recruiting autophagy substrates. We will extent the discussion of the evolution of the AIMs/UIMs that are anchored SARs, as well as the SARs-mediated various types of selective autophagy in relevant biological processes between Arabidopsis and rice in the following.
Involvement of ATG8-Interacting Motif Proteins in Various Types of Selective Autophagy
ATG8-Interacting Motif Proteins in Xenophagy
The Neighbor of BRCA 1 (NBR1) has been markedly documented as a master SAR of xenophagy, aiding in pathogen defense using either pro-death or pro-survival strategies (
FIGURE 2

The evolution of AIMs derived from the known ATG8-interacting proteins in plants. Degenerate sequences of AIMs of known ATG8-interacting proteins by which AIMs in Arabidopsis thaliana and Oryza sativa are shown in yellow and green, respectively. Blue sequences are consensus amino acids of AIMs in both species. The rice AIM containing proteins are derived from alignments of Arabidopsis proteins known to interact with ATG8 from the NCBI database (https://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/). AtNBR1 (Q9SB64.1), OsNBR1 (KAF2945618.1), AtORM1 (NP_563622.1), OsORM1 (XP_015627600.1), AtORM2 (NP_199015.1), OsORM2 (XP_015637165.1), AtDSK2 (NP_565407.1), OsDSK2 (XP_015614223.1), AtPEX10 (NP_001323820.1), OsPEX10 (BAG87060.1), AtPEX6 (NP_171799.2), OsPEX6 (XP_015634963.1), AtLON2 (NP_568675.1), OsLON2 (BAD33324.1), AtC53 (NP_196301.2), OsC53 (XP_015644258.1), AtATI1 (NP_566059.1), OsATI1 (NP_001052131.1), AtATI2 (NP_567174.1), OsATI2 (NP_001048554.1), AtGSNOR (NP_001190468.1), OsGSNOR (XP_015627169.1), AtTSPO (NP_566110.1), OsTSPO (XP_015639220.1).
Arabidopsis orosomucoid (ORM) proteins (ORM1 and ORM2) acting as negative regulators of sphingolipid biosynthesis are thought to function in mediating xenophagy (
ATG8-Interacting Motif Proteins in Aggrephagy
In addition to the role in xenophagy, NBR1 is also involved in the aggrephagy, which turns over the misfolded proteins caused by mutations, incomplete translations, misfolding after translation, aberrant protein modifications, oxidative damage, and ill-formed protein complexes (Sun et al., 2020). In Arabidopsis, AtNBR1 has two Ubiquitin-Associated (UBA) domains, but only the C-terminal UBA domain can bind ubiquitin. Both Arabidopsis and tomato nbr1 mutants were hypersensitive to heat and oxidative stress, and ubiquitinated protein aggregates were highly accumulated in them (Zhou et al., 2013, 2014), suggesting that NBR1 is functionally conserved in aggrephagy among different plant species. However, the exact regulatory mechanism of NBR1-mediated aggrephagy in plants is still unclear. A recent report in human pathology revealed that the aggregation of ubiquitinated proteins by NBR1 was regulated by the Glycogen Synthase Kinase 3 (GSK3)-mediated phosphorylation of NBR1 (Nicot et al., 2014), suggesting NBR1-dependent aggrephagy is determined by posttranslational modification of its protein status. This regulation is also deserved to be verified in different plants, as well as the upstream signal of NBR1, such as corresponding kinase. Correspondingly, the OsNBR1 also seems to perform similarly as the highly conserved AIMs present (Figure 2).
ATG8-Interacting Motif Proteins in Pexophagy
A selective degradation of peroxisomes by autophagy (termed as pexophagy) has been documented in plants (
A LON protease 2 (LON2) is an AAA ATPase thought to prevent pexophagy. The loss of LON2 caused the decrease of peroxisome number and higher pexophagy (
ATG8-Interacting Motif Proteins in Chlorophagy
The ATG8-interacting protein 1 (ATI1) and its homolog ATI2 were discovered by a yeast two-hybrid screen in Arabidopsis. They contain one predicted transmembrane (TM) domain and two putative AIMs (NEWEVV and ERWQIL) (
ATG8-Interacting Motif Protein in Brassinosteroid Signaling
The dominant suppressor of KAR 2 (DSK2) is a SAR containing two regions with high-fidelity AIMs (ESFKEL, EGFNML, and RMYENV) in Arabidopsis (Figure 2). Obviously, DSK2 has been verified to interact with ATG8 and target BRI1-EMS Suppressor 1 (BES1) that is essential for brassinosteroid (BR) signaling transduction for autophagic degradation (Nolan et al., 2017). By regulating the BES1 level, DSK2 can alter growth status in response to fixed-carbon starvation or drought stress. Moreover, DSK2 is regulated by the phosphorylation of Brassinosteroid Insensitive 2 (BIN2) kinase (Zhao et al., 2002), and the phosphorylation of DSK2a facilitates the binding to ATG8.
Notably, one homologous DSK2 (termed as OsDSK2a) is reported in rice (Wang et al., 2020). The OsDSK2a is predicted to have two similar AIMs (EGFNML and RMYETV) as AtDSK2 (Figure 2 and Table 2), implying that OsDSK2a may also interact with ATG8 and participate in autophagic degradation of BR signaling-related components, thereby regulating the rice growth under stress. Interestingly, AIMs (EGFNML and RMYETV) of OsDSK2a are also surrounded by BIN2 phosphorylation consensus sites (S/T-X-X-X-S/T) (Zhao et al., 2002; Figure 2), suggesting that activated BIN2 would enhance the interaction between DSK2 and ATG8. Owing to this hypothesis, we propose that BIN2 also indirectly participate in the regulation of autophagy. On another hand, the conserved sequences similarity makes us to hypothesize that OsDSK2a may be also phosphorylated proximal to AIMs by OsBIN2, thereby promoting physical interaction between OsDSK2a and OsATG8. Notably, different from BR-mediated plant phenotypes in Arabidopsis, such as dwarfism and the cabbage-like rosette leaf regarding the bin2/+ mutants, leaf angle is one of the most obvious traits determined by BR signaling in rice, for instance, OsBZR1-RNAi rice displayed erect leaf (
TABLE 2
| Speciesa | Protein name (Locusb) | Patternc | Annotation | References |
| A. thaliana | RPN10 (NP_195575.1) | NIDPELALALRVSMEEERAR | Degradation of inactive 26S proteasomes | Marshall et al., 2019; |
| EDSALLDQAIAMSVGDVNMS | ||||
| DEDQDLALALQMSMSGEESS | ||||
| PUX7 (NP_001077536.1) | EEEEELQRALAASLEDNNMK | Encodes a nuclear UBX-containing protein that can bridge ubiquitin to AtCDC48A | ||
| PUX8 (NP_567380.2) | IEEEMIRAAIEASKKEAEGS | Unknown | ||
| EDDDDIAIAVTMSLKSAEEE | ||||
| PUX9 (NP_680549.3) | AEEEMIRAAIEASKKDFQEG | Unknown | Marshall et al., 2019 | |
| REDEDIARAISMSLEMEEHE | ||||
| PUX13 (NP_567675.1) | EDDDDDDDDDPDYVEEEEEP | Unknown | ||
| O. sativa | RPN10 (XP_025876380.1) | NAd | Unknown | In this study |
| PUX7 (XP_015633410.1) | DEDEELARAVAASLEESKGS | Unknown | In this study | |
| PUX8 (XP_015612508.1) | NA | Unknown | In this study | |
| PUX9 (XP_015617568.1) | NA | Unknown | In this study | |
| PUX13 (XP_015615014.1) | NA | Unknown | In this study |
Known the ubiquitin-interacting motif proteins in plant.
aA. thaliana, Arabidopsis thaliana; O. sativa, Oryza sativa.
bGene Locus of the each protein is derived from TAIR (https://www.Arabidopsis.org/index.jsp) and China Rice Data Center (http://www.ricedata.cn/gene/).
cPattern is the sequences of the UIM.
dNA, not applicable.
ATG8-Interacting Motif Protein in Iron Metabolism
Another verified SAR with potential AIMs is tryptophan-rich sensory protein (TSPO). TSPOs are membrane proteins that participate in maintaining the concentration of free heme and porphyrins in the plant cells. AtTSPO is transiently induced by ABA and abiotic stresses. The accumulation of TSPO is strictly regulated, with its degradation driven by autophagy using a potential AIM (ALYLYL) (Vanhee et al., 2011; Figure 2). Furthermore, it has also reported that TSPO binds to a plasma membrane-localized aquaporin, plasma membrane intrinsic protein 2;7 (PIP2;7) (
ATG8-Interacting Motif Protein With Posttranslational Modification
Nitric oxide (NO) is a major cellular signal to modulate plant stress response by S-nitrosylated stress-associated proteins at their Cys residue. A newly uncovered mechanism of autophagy in regulating NO signaling has been described recently in Arabidopsis, showing that the NO mediator GSNO reductase (GSNOR) is targeted by ATG8 through its AIM (YTVV; residues 152–155; Figure 2), which required S-nitrosylation of GSNOR at C-10 residue for exposing this motif to enable its interaction with ATG8 (Zhan et al., 2018). Such nitrosylation-mediated autophagy is operated upon hypoxia response, which is also considered as a remarkable physiological response during submergence. Previously, it has been illustrated that ethylene confers the rice response to waterlogging by SD1- or ethylene response factors SNORKEL1 and SNORKEL2-mediated GA signaling and biosynthesis (
ATG8-Interacting Motif Protein C53 With Endoplasmic Reticulum-Phagy
Eukaryotes have evolved various quality control mechanisms to promote proteostasis in the ER. Selective removal of certain ER domains via autophagy (termed as ER-phagy) has emerged as a major quality control mechanism (Karagöz et al., 2019;
ATG8-Interacting Motif Proteins in Other Biological Processes
As indicated above, the regulation of AIM proteins generally depends on the canonical autophagy. However, there is a contrast case that the ABNORMAL SHOOT3 (ABS3) interacts with ATG8 through two AIMs (WAPL and WVGL) in the late endosome, but the autophagic route is not necessary for such interaction (Jia et al., 2019), thereby defining a novel function of ATG8 independent on autophagy. Notably, further investigation suggested that ABS3 in monocot plants also harbors the two highly conserved AIMs, for instance, in wheat, enabling its interaction with ATG8 (Jia et al., 2019). From this point of view, biological process underlying interaction of AIM proteins with non-autophagic function of ATG8 should be paid much more attentions in the future.
Another recent report showed that the heterotrimeric G-protein complex and regulator of G-protein signaling 1 (AtRGS1) interacts with ATG8a in Arabidopsis (Jiao et al., 2019). The study proved that both the N-terminal seven TM (7TM) domain and cytoplasmic RGS domain interact with ATG8, but it is still unknown which domain possess the functional AIMs. This raises a commonly important issue regarding the AIM, why the AIM protein needs several AIMs functioning to interact with ATG8? One possibility is for ensuring the interaction between AIM protein and ATG8 to avoid that one of the AIMs was mutated during evolution and another one could complement. Another possibility is to enhance the interaction affinity and efficiency for rapid response to particular stimuli. Certainly, both assumptions may be tenable, but require further evidence.
Except AIM proteins mentioned above, a part of AIMs of others, but not the proteins themselves, have not been experimentally validated (Table 2). Vierstra group has deduced that the membrane-targeting regulators FYVE2 and FYVE3 likely function to associate autophagosomes to microtubules (Marshall and Vierstra, 2018). The FYVE2 was isolated from an interactome underlying yeast two-hybrid, indicating it interacts with ATG8 in Arabidopsis. Previous study suggested that FYVE proteins were predominantly thought to regulate various trafficking pathways (Wywial and Singh, 2010), inspiring the idea that FYVE proteins might bind and deliver ATG8 to relevant location to target the autophagy cargo receptors or cargo proteins.
There are some rest ATG8-interacting proteins identified by protein-protein assay, including chloroplast development regulator Golden 2-Like 1 (GLK1), Kinesin motor family protein KIN7.4, transporter protein GLT1, scaffolding protein of Cajal body COILIN, Nitrate Transporter 1 (NTR1)/Peptide Transporter 2 (PTR2), and Sucrose Transporter 3 (SUC3) in Arabidopsis (
ATG8-Interacting Motif-Independent ATG8 Interaction: Ubiquitin-Interacting Motif Proteins
Several ATG8-interacting proteins are known to bind ATG8 in an AIM-independent manner (
Another case of UIM protein is the plant ubiquitin regulatory X domain (PUX) proteins, which bind ATPase CDC48 (p97 in humans) to regulate the latter one’s assembly and activity, leading to diverse cellular activities (Rancour et al., 2004;
Previously, the clathrin Adaptor Protein-1 Mu-adaptin 2 (AP1M2) and ER-localized co-chaperone B-cell lymphoma 2 (Bcl-2)-Associated Athanogene 7 (BAG7) have not shown to be associated with ATG8 and/or autophagy (Park et al., 2013; Nawkar et al., 2018). However, they may still function as specific cargo receptors or adaptors for autophagic vesicle dynamics, because the putative UIMs are found in both OsAP1M2 and OsBAG7 but not the Arabidopsis ones (Marshall et al., 2019), implying that UIMs of AP1M2 and BAG7 are evolutionarily differentiated between dicotyledonous and monocotyledonous plants. Therefore, we assume that this kind of genetic variation causes a diversified evolutionary fate of such UIM protein-dependent autophagy within plant species.
Future Perspectives
The plants conduct various strategies to conquer challenges from changing environmental conditions. Autophagy is one of the most robust strategies, which is highly conserved in eukaryotes and involved in plant development and stress responses. However, there are still many opening questions regarding the biological significance of autophagic degradation of specific targets (Figure 3). ATG8 is one of the best-studied proteins of the core autophagy machinery. In selective autophagy, ATG8 proteins play dual roles in the formation of autophagosome and recruitment of SARs, respectively. The latter role of ATG8 is generally dependent on the AIM/UIM present in the SARs. Absolutely, identification of the SARs enables to dissect the specific function of autophagy in relevant biological processes. The iLIR and hfAIM predicting AIM are available for this goal. Since there are less UIM proteins verified experimentally, it is hard to conclude a regular pattern of its canonical sequences, limiting the high-throughput screening of UIM proteins by bioinformatics. Although the two available bioinformatic approaches are powerful for identifying AIM, false positives still cannot be avoided. Therefore, more specific and stringent criteria are still pursued. The location of AIM in disordered region can be considered as one reference index. However, it has to keep in mind that a part of AIM proteins would expose its AIM after posttranslational modification, such as the GSNOR mentioned above, or the interaction affinity of them with ATG8 would be strengthened by conformational changes, such as negative charge form surrounding AIM. Therefore, bench work is still needed for confirmation. Recently, the AlphaFold has been developed for predicting the protein structure with enormous fidelity (Jumper et al., 2021; Tunyasuvunakool et al., 2021), which would potentially improve the identification of AIM and UIM based on the structural conservation of verified ones. Comparison of the conservation of AIM among different plant species can facilitate our knowledge of undefined regulatory mechanism of autophagy in certain organisms. Notably, if there is no homolog of AIM/UIM proteins among different plant species, it is also quite valuable for exploring the evolutionary differentiation of autophagy regarding these AIM/UIM proteins.
FIGURE 3

Schematic representation of various selective autophagy pathways known in plants. The autophagic degradation routes for organelles, protein complexes, protein aggregates, and pathogens are shown, and unique features of each are highlighted. Numerous examples of intracellular pathogens being degraded by autophagy (called xenophagy), such as NBR1-mediated elimination of the cauliflower mosaic virus (CaMV) P4 protein. Interestingly, the turnip mosaic virus (TuMV) could induce unfolded protein response (UPR)-dependent NBR1-ATG8 autophagy to enhance virus propagation to protect itself. Degradation of chloroplasts via chlorophagy may occur through the formation of ATI1/2-decorated bodies containing plastid membrane proteins from either the outer envelope or thylakoids during the carbon starvation or salt stress. Both peroxisome proteins PEX6 and PEX10 can interact with ATG8 via their own AIMs, suggesting that these proteins may trigger pexophagy to maintain the cell validity. Both ATG1 and ATG11 contain an AIM that likely connect ATG1 kinase complex to the pre-autophagosomal structure. The interaction may not only help the pre-autophagosomal structure assembly, but also promote its autophagic turnover. Degradation of tryptophan-rich sensory protein (TSPO) by selective autophagy has been supposed as an iron metabolic mechanism to effectively clear porphyrins in cell and to control the water uptake by selective removal of plasma membrane aquaporins during osmotic stress. The brassinosteroid (BR) signaling transcription factor BES1 is degraded by selective autophagy upon ubiquitylation and delivery to the phagophore by DSK2, with binding to the ATG8 regulated by BIN2-mediated phosphorylation around its AIMs. NO-mediated S-nitrosylation of GSNOR because local conformational changes that render its AIM accessible for ATG8, thereby inducing selective autophagy of GSNOR to regulate hypoxia responses. Some rest ATG8-interacting proteins, including GLT1, NTR1/PTR2, and SUC3 in Arabidopsis.
It has to remind that plant ATG8 family proteins generally consist of multiple isoforms, such as there are nine isoforms in Arabidopsis and seven in rice (Kwon and Park, 2008; Xia et al., 2011). Though it has been proposed that these isoforms would function redundantly, it is still deserved to dissect their divergent functions in different biological processes. The specific spatial and temporal expression pattern of them might determine which cargo receptors or cargo proteins would be recruited by corresponding ATG8 individual. Considering autophagy degrades proteins, broad proteomic profiling of autophagy mutants and ATG-overexpression lines might provide candidates associated with selective autophagy. Integrative analysis of AIM/UIM present in such proteins could further support the fidelity of them. Although so many AIM/UIM proteins have been extensively characterized, it is very interesting to ask if there are still numerous proteins independent on these motifs for an unknown route underlying selective autophagy. The establishment of novel methods to monitor and investigate autophagy in planta would be helpful for screening and deciphering such components. Nonetheless, more than one AIM/UIM might be located in some AIM/UIM proteins, such as ABS3 harboring two functional AIMs mentioned above, which might complement the effect of each other. In this scenario, multiple mutations of them are all necessary for elucidating the underlying mechanism.
In summary, autophagy plays a pivotal role in maintaining cellular homeostasis. This degradation regulation ensures the clearance of macromolecules, including protein complex, large aggregate, and even the entire pathogen and organelle. Furthermore, it also functions as positive rather than passive effect by recycling nutrients for new issues and organs development under stressful condition, such as seed, eventually ensuring plants survival, and transmitting progeny. Crop yield and productivity have been adversely threatened by recent extreme climate change and environmental stresses. To feed the growing population worldwide, genetic improvement and breeding of new crop varieties with higher yield upon suboptimal conditions are indeed desirable, and thus manipulation of autophagy may be a useful strategy for tackling this task.
Publisher’s Note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Statements
Author contributions
QX and WL conceived the idea. QX, WL, and ZL led the writing of the manuscript. ZL and ZM helped in revising the manuscript and prepared the figures. QX, WL, SG, and YL reviewed, edited, and improved the manuscript. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.
Funding
This work was supported by the Major Program of Guangdong Basic and Applied Research (2019B030302006) to QX, Guangdong Scientific Program Project (2020B1212060047) to WL, the Guangdong Basic and Applied Basic Research Foundation (2021A1515-012053), and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31971920), as well as the support from the “Top Young Scientist of the Pearl River Talent Plan” (No. 20170104) to QX, and the grant from the State Key Laboratory for Conservation and Utilization of Subtropical Agro-Bioresources (SKLCUSA-a202008) to QX and YL. We are grateful for the support of the experimental platform and funding from the Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Plant Molecular Breeding (No. GPKLPMB201804).
Acknowledgments
We apologize in advance to colleagues whose valuable work was not cited due to article length considerations.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
References
1
Arabidopsis Consortium (2011). Evidence for network evolution in an Arabidopsis interactome map.Science333601–607. 10.1126/science.1203877
2
Ascencio-IbáñezJ.SozzaniR.LeeT.ChuT.WolfingerR.CellaR.et al (2008). Global analysis of Arabidopsis gene expression uncovers a complex array of changes impacting pathogen response and cell cycle during geminivirus infection.J. Plant Physiol.148436–454. 10.1104/pp.108.121038
3
Avin-WittenbergT.MichaeliS.HonigA.GaliliG. (2012). ATI1, a newly identified atg8-interacting protein, binds two different Atg8 homologs.Plant Signal. Behav.7685–687. 10.4161/psb.20030
4
BaiM.ZhangL.GampalaS. S.ZhuS.SongW.ChongK.et al (2007). Functions of OsBZR1 and 14-3-3 proteins in brassinosteroid signaling in rice.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A10413839–13844. 10.1073/pnas.0706386104
5
BartelB.FarmerL. M.RinaldiM. A.YoungP. G.DananC. H.BurkhartS. E. (2014). Mutation of the Arabidopsis LON2 peroxisomal protease enhances pexophagy.Autophagy10518–519. 10.4161/auto.27565
6
BaslamM.Baroja-FernándezE.Ricarte-BermejoA.Sánchez-LópezÁAranjueloI.BahajiA.et al (2017). Genetic and isotope ratio mass spectrometric evidence for the occurrence of starch degradation and cycling in illuminated Arabidopsis leaves.PLoS One12:e0171245. 10.1371/journal.pone.0171245
7
BasshamD. C.LaporteM.MartyF.MoriyasuY.OhsumiY. (2006). Autophagy in development and stress responses of plants.Autophagy22–11. 10.4161/auto.2092
8
BehrendsC.SowaM. E.GygiS. P.HarperJ. W. (2010). Network organization of the human autophagy system.Nature46668–76.
9
BertoniM.KieferF.BiasiniM.BordoliL.SchwedeT. (2017). Modeling protein quaternary structure of homo- and hetero-oligomers beyond binary interactions by homology.Sci. Rep.7:10480. 10.1038/s41598-017-09654-8
10
BienertS.WaterhouseA.de BeerT.TaurielloG.StuderG.BordoliL.et al (2017). The SWISS-MODEL Repository-new features and functionality.Nucleic Acids Res.45D313–D319. 10.1093/nar/gkw1132
11
BreslowD. K.CollinsS. R.BodenmillerB.AebersoldR.SimonsK.ShevchenkoA.et al (2010). Orm family proteins mediate sphingolipid homeostasis.Nature4631048–1053. 10.1038/nature08787
12
BurkhartS. E.KaoY. T.BartelB. (2014). Peroxisomal ubiquitin-protein ligases peroxin2 and peroxin10 have distinct but synergistic roles in matrix protein import and peroxin5 retrotranslocation in Arabidopsis.Plant Physiol.1661329–1344. 10.1104/pp.114.247148
13
ChaparroJ.BadriD.BakkerM.SugiyamaA.ManterD.VivancoJ. M. (2013). Root exudation of phytochemicals in Arabidopsis follows specific patterns that are developmentally programmed and correlate with soil microbial functions.PLoS One8:e55731. 10.1371/journal.pone.0055731
14
ChenJ.LalondeS.ObrdlikP.Noorani VataniA.ParsaS. A. (2012). Uncovering Arabidopsis membrane protein interactome enriched in transporters using mating-based split ubiquitin assays and classification models.Front. Plant Sci.3:124. 10.3389/fpls.2012.00124
15
ChenL.LiaoB.QiH.XieL. J.HuangL.TanW. J.et al (2015). Autophagy contributes to regulation of the hypoxia response during submergence in Arabidopsis thaliana.Autophagy112233–2246. 10.1080/15548627.2015.1112483
16
ChinoH.MizushimaN. (2020). ER-Phagy: quality Control and Turnover of Endoplasmic Reticulum.Trends Cell Biol.30384–398. 10.1016/j.tcb.2020.02.001
17
ChoiM.KimE.SongJ.ChoiS.ChoS.ParkC. S.et al (2020). Peptide transporter2 (PTR2) enhances water uptake during early seed germination in Arabidopsis thaliana.Plant Mol. Biol.102615–624. 10.1007/s11103-020-00967-3
18
ChungT.SuttangkakulA.VierstraR. D. (2009). The ATG autophagic conjugation system in maize: ATG transcripts and abundance of the ATG8-lipid adduct are regulated by development and nutrient availability.Plant Physiol.149220–234. 10.1104/pp.108.126714
19
Dal BoscoC.LezhnevaL.BiehlA.LeisterD.StrotmannH.WannerG. (2004). Inactivation of the chloroplast ATP synthase gamma subunit results in high non-photochemical fluorescence quenching and altered nuclear gene expression in Arabidopsis thaliana.J. Biol. Chem.2791060–1069. 10.1074/jbc.M308435200
20
de la Fuente van BentemS.AnratherD.DohnalI.RoitingerE.CsaszarE. (2008). Site-specific phosphorylation profiling of Arabidopsis proteins by mass spectrometry and peptide chip analysis.J. Proteome Res.72458–2470. 10.1021/pr8000173
21
DeruyffelaereC.PurkrtovaZ.BouchezI.ColletB.CacasJ.ChardotT.et al (2018). PUX10 Is a CDC48A Adaptor Protein That Regulates the Extraction of Ubiquitinated Oleosins from Seed Lipid Droplets in Arabidopsis.Plant Cell302116–2136. 10.1105/tpc.18.00275
22
DikicI. (2017). Proteasomal and Autophagic Degradation Systems.Annu. Rev. Biochem.86193–224. 10.1146/annurev-biochem-061516-044908
23
DobrenelT.CaldanaC.HansonJ.RobagliaC.VincentzM.VeitB.et al (2016). TOR Signaling and Nutrient Sensing.Annu. Rev. Plant Biol.67261–285. 10.1146/annurev-arplant-043014-114648
24
DoellingJ. H.WalkerJ. M.FriedmanE. M.ThompsonA. R.VierstraR. D. (2002). The APG8/12-activating enzyme APG7 is required for proper nutrient recycling and senescence in Arabidopsis thaliana.J. Biol. Chem.27733105–33114. 10.1074/jbc.M204630200
25
DouL.HeK.PengJ.WangX.MaoT. (2021). The E3 ligase MREL57 modulates microtubule stability and stomatal closure in response to ABA.Nat. Commun.12:2181. 10.1038/s41467-021-22455-y
26
FangJ.ChuC. (2008). Abscisic acid and the pre-harvest sprouting in cereals.Plant Signal. Behav.31046–1048. 10.4161/psb.3.12.6606
27
FarmerL. M.RinaldiM. A.YoungP. G.DananC. H.BurkhartS. E. (2013). Disrupting autophagy restores peroxisome function to an Arabidopsis lon2 mutant and reveals a role for the LON2 protease in peroxisomal matrix protein degradation.Plant Cell254085–4100. 10.1105/tpc.113.113407
28
FarréJ. C.SubramaniS. (2016). Mechanistic insights into selective autophagy pathways: lessons from yeast.Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol.17537–552. 10.1038/nrm.2016.74
29
GalloisJ. L.DrouaudJ.LecureuilA.Guyon-DebastA.BonhommeS.GuercheP. (2013). Functional characterization of the plant ubiquitin regulatory X (UBX) domain-containing protein AtPUX7 in Arabidopsis thaliana.Gene526299–308. 10.1016/j.gene.2013.05.056
30
GaoC.LuoM.ZhaoQ.YangR.CuiY.ZengY.et al (2014). A unique plant ESCRT component, FREE1, regulates multivesicular body protein sorting and plant growth.Curr. Biol.242556–2563. 10.1016/j.cub.2014.09.014
31
GaoM.LiG.McCombieW.QuirosC. (2005). Comparative analysis of a transposon-rich Brassica oleracea BAC clone with its corresponding sequence in A. thaliana.Theor. Appl. Genet.111949–955. 10.1007/s00122-005-0029-9
32
GerakisY.QuinteroM.LiH.HetzC. (2019). The UFMylation System in Proteostasis and Beyond.Trends Cell Biol.29974–986. 10.1016/j.tcb.2019.09.005
33
GhusingaK.ParedesF.JonesA.ColaneriA. (2021). Reported differences in the flg22 response of the null mutation of AtRGS1 correlates with fixed genetic variation in the background of Col-0 isolates.Plant Signal. Behav.16:1878685. 10.1080/15592324.2021.1878685
34
GishL. A.GagneJ. M.HanL.DeyoungB. J.ClarkS. E. (2013). WUSCHEL-responsive At5g65480 interacts with CLAVATA components in vitro and in transient expression.PLoS One8:e66345. 10.1371/journal.pone.0066345
35
GommersC.Ruiz-SolaM.AyatsA.PereiraL.PujolM. (2021). GENOMES UNCOUPLED1-independent retrograde signaling targets the ethylene pathway to repress photomorphogenesis.J. Plant Physiol.18567–76. 10.1093/plphys/kiaa015
36
Goto-YamadaS.ManoS.NakamoriC.KondoM.YamawakiR.KatoA.et al (2014). Chaperone and protease functions of LON protease 2 modulate the peroxisomal transition and degradation with autophagy.Plant Cell Physiol.55482–496. 10.1093/pcp/pcu017
37
GuexN.PeitschM.SchwedeT. (2009). Automated comparative protein structure modeling with SWISS-MODEL and Swiss-PdbViewer: a historical perspective.Electrophoresis30S162–S173. 10.1002/elps.200900140
38
HachezC.VeljanovskiV.ReinhardtH.GuillaumotD.VanheeC.ChaumontF.et al (2015). The Arabidopsis abiotic stress-induced TSPO-related protein reduces cell-surface expression of the aquaporin PIP2;7 through protein-protein interactions and autophagic degradation.Plant Cell264974–4990. 10.1105/tpc.114.134080
39
HafrénA.MaciaJ. L.LoveA. J.MilnerJ. J.DruckerM.HofiusD. (2017). Selective autophagy limits cauliflower mosaic virus infection by NBR1-mediated targeting of viral capsid protein and particles.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.114E2026–E2035. 10.1073/pnas.1610687114
40
HanS.LoneM. A.SchneiterR.ChangA. (2010). Orm1 and Orm2 are conserved endoplasmic reticulum membrane proteins regulating lipid homeostasis and protein quality control.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.1075851–5856. 10.1073/pnas.0911617107
41
HattoriY.NagaiK.FurukawaS.SongX. J.KawanoR.SakakibaraH.et al (2009). The ethylene response factors SNORKEL1 and SNORKEL2 allow rice to adapt to deep water.Nature4601026–1030. 10.1038/nature08258
42
HiroseT.ZhangZ.MiyaoA.HirochikaH.OhsugiR.TeraoT. (2010). Disruption of a gene for rice sucrose transporter, OsSUT1, impairs pollen function but pollen maturation is unaffected.J. Exp. Bot.613639–3646. 10.1093/jxb/erq175
43
HofiusD.LiL.HafrénA.CollN. (2017). Autophagy as an emerging arena for plant-pathogen interactions.Curr. Opin. Plant Biol.38117–123. 10.1016/j.pbi.2017.04.017
44
HofmannK.FalquetL. (2001). A ubiquitin-interacting motif conserved in components of the proteasomal and lysosomal protein degradation systems.Trends Biochem. Sci.26347–350. 10.1016/s0968-0004(01)01835-7
45
HonigA.Avin-WittenbergT.UfazS.GaliliG. (2012). A new type of compartment, defined by plant-specific Atg8-interacting proteins, is induced upon exposure of Arabidopsis plants to carbon starvation.Plant Cell24288–303. 10.1105/tpc.111.093112
46
HusnjakK.DikicI. (2012). Ubiquitin-binding proteins: decoders of ubiquitin-mediated cellular functions.Annu. Rev. Biochem.81291–322. 10.1146/annurev-biochem-051810-094654
47
ItoY.KurataN. (2006). Identification and characterization of cytokinin-signalling gene families in rice.Gene38257–65. 10.1016/j.gene.2006.06.020
48
JametE.AlbenneC.BoudartG.IrshadM.CanutH. (2008). Recent advances in plant cell wall proteomics.Proteomics8893–908. 10.1002/pmic.200700938
49
JiaM.LiuX.XueH.WuY.ShiL.WangR.et al (2019). Noncanonical ATG8-ABS3 interaction controls senescence in plants.Nat. Plants5212–224. 10.1038/s41477-018-0348-x
50
JiaoY.SrbaM.WangJ.ChenW. (2019). Correlation of Autophagosome Formation with Degradation and Endocytosis Arabidopsis Regulator of G-Protein Signaling (RGS1) through ATG8a.Int. J. Mol. Sci.20:4190. 10.3390/ijms20174190
51
JieO.ZhaoyanC.KuaifeiX.YaqingW.JunD. (2010). Identification and analysis of eight peptide transporter homologs in rice.Plant Sci.179374–382. 10.1016/j.plantsci.2010.06.013
52
JumperJ.EvansR.PritzelA.GreenT.FigurnovM.RonnebergerO.et al (2021). Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold.Nature596583–589. 10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2
53
JurkiewiczP.SenicourtL.AyebH.LequinO.LacapereJ. J.BatokoH. (2020). A Plant-Specific N-terminal Extension Reveals Evolutionary Functional Divergence within Translocator Proteins.iScience23:100889. 10.1016/j.isci.2020.100889
54
KalinowskaK.IsonoE.BozhkovP. (2018). All roads lead to the vacuole-autophagic transport as part of the endomembrane trafficking network in plants.J. Exp. Bot.691313–1324. 10.1093/jxb/erx395
55
KalvariI.TsompanisS.MulakkalN. C.OsgoodR.JohansenT.NezisI. P.et al (2014). iLIR: a web resource for prediction of Atg8-family interacting proteins.Autophagy10913–925. 10.4161/auto.28260
56
KannoT.VenhuizenP.WuM.ChiouP.ChangC.KalynaM.et al (2020). A Collection of Pre-mRNA Splicing Mutants in Arabidopsis thaliana.G3101983–1996. 10.1534/g3.119.400998
57
KaragözG. E.Acosta-AlvearD.WalterP. (2019). The Unfolded Protein Response: detecting and Responding to Fluctuations in the Protein-Folding Capacity of the Endoplasmic Reticulum.Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol.11:a033886. 10.1101/cshperspect.a033886
58
KaurN.ZhaoQ.XieQ.HuJ. (2013). Arabidopsis RING peroxins are E3 ubiquitin ligases that interact with two homologous ubiquitin receptor proteins(F).J. Integr. Plant Biol.55108–120. 10.1111/jipb.12014
59
KetelaarT.VossC.DimmockS. A.ThummM.HusseyP. J. (2004). Arabidopsis homologues of the autophagy protein Atg8 are a novel family of microtubule binding proteins.FEBS Lett.567302–306. 10.1016/j.febslet.2004.04.088
60
KimJ.LeeH.LeeH. N.KimS. H.ShinK. D. (2013). Autophagy-related proteins are required for degradation of peroxisomes in Arabidopsis hypocotyls during seedling growth.Plant Cell254956–4966. 10.1105/tpc.113.117960
61
KimberlinA. N.HanG.LuttgeharmK. D.ChenM.CahoonR. E.StoneJ. M.et al (2016). ORM Expression Alters Sphingolipid Homeostasis and Differentially Affects Ceramide Synthase Activity.Plant Physiol.172889–900. 10.1104/pp.16.00965
62
KlionskyD. J. (2008). Autophagy revisited: a conversation with Christian de Duve.Autophagy4740–743. 10.4161/auto.6398
63
KlopffleischK.PhanN.AugustinK.BayneR. S.BookerK. S.BotellaJ. R.et al (2011). Arabidopsis G-protein interactome reveals connections to cell wall carbohydrates and morphogenesis.Mol. Syst. Biol.7:532. 10.1038/msb.2011.66
64
KolbC.NagelM. K.KalinowskaK.HagmannJ.IchikawaM. (2015). FYVE1 is essential for vacuole biogenesis and intracellular trafficking in Arabidopsis.Plant Physiol.1671361–1373. 10.1104/pp.114.253377
65
KraftC.KijanskaM.KalieE.SiergiejukE.LeeS.SemplicioG.et al (2012). Binding of the Atg1/ULK1 kinase to the ubiquitin-like protein Atg8 regulates autophagy.EMBO J.313691–3703. 10.1038/emboj.2012.225
66
KurohaT.NagaiK.GamuyaoR.WangD.FurutaT.NakamoriM.et al (2018). Ethylene-gibberellin signaling underlies adaptation of rice to periodic flooding.Science361181–186. 10.1126/science.aat1577
67
KwonS.ParkO. K. (2008). Autophagy in Plants.Plant Biol.51313–320. 10.1007/BF03036132
68
LéranS.VaralaK.BoyerJ.ChiurazziM.CrawfordN.Daniel-VedeleF.et al (2014). A unified nomenclature of NITRATE TRANSPORTER 1/PEPTIDE TRANSPORTER family members in plants.Trends Plant Sci.195–9. 10.1016/j.tplants.2013.08.008
69
LetunicI.BorkP. (2018). 20 years of the SMART protein domain annotation resource.Nucleic Acids Res.46D493–D496. 10.1093/nar/gkx922
70
LetunicI.KhedkarS.BorkP. (2021). SMART: recent updates, new developments and status in 2020.Nucleic Acids Res.49D458–D460. 10.1093/nar/gkaa937
71
LiF.ChungT.VierstraR. D. (2014). AUTOPHAGY-RELATED11 plays a critical role in general autophagy- and senescence-induced mitophagy in Arabidopsis.Plant Cell26788–807. 10.1105/tpc.113.120014
72
LiF.ZhangC.TangZ.ZhangL.DaiZ.LyuS.et al (2020). A plant RNA virus activates selective autophagy in a UPR-dependent manner to promote virus infection.New Phytol.228622–639. 10.1111/nph.16716
73
LiJ.ZhouW.FranciscoP.WongR.ZhangD.SmithS. M. (2017). Inhibition of Arabidopsis chloroplast β-amylase BAM3 by maltotriose suggests a mechanism for the control of transitory leaf starch mobilisation.PLoS One12:e0172504. 10.1371/journal.pone.0172504
74
LinL.YangP.HuangX.ZhangH.LuQ.ZhangH. (2013). The scaffold protein EPG-7 links cargo-receptor complexes with the autophagic assembly machinery.J. Cell Biol.201113–129. 10.1083/jcb.201209098
75
LiuY.BasshamD. C. (2010). TOR is a negative regulator of autophagy in Arabidopsis thaliana.PLoS One5:e11883. 10.1371/journal.pone.0011883
76
LiuY.FangJ.XuF.ChuJ.YanC.SchläppiM. R.et al (2014). Expression patterns of ABA and GA metabolism genes and hormone levels during rice seed development and imbibition: a comparison of dormant and non-dormant rice cultivars.J. Genet. Genomics41327–338. 10.1016/j.jgg.2014.04.004
77
MarshallR.HuaZ.MaliS.McLoughlinF.VierstraR. (2019). ATG8-Binding UIM Proteins Define a New Class of Autophagy Adaptors and Receptors.Cell177766–781.e24. 10.1016/j.cell.2019.02.009
78
MarshallR. S.LiF.GemperlineD. C.BookA. J.VierstraR. D. (2015). Autophagic Degradation of the 26S Proteasome Is Mediated by the Dual ATG8/Ubiquitin Receptor RPN10 in Arabidopsis.Mol. Cell581053–1066. 10.1016/j.molcel.2015.04.023
79
MarshallR. S.VierstraR. D. (2018). Autophagy: the Master of Bulk and Selective Recycling.Annu. Rev. Plant Biol.69173–208. 10.1146/annurev-arplant-042817-040606
80
MeiY.SuM.SoniG.SalemS.ColbertC. L. (2014). Intrinsically disordered regions in autophagy proteins.Proteins82565–578. 10.1002/prot.24424
81
MichaeliS.HonigA.LevanonyH.Peled-ZehaviH.GaliliG. (2014). Arabidopsis ATG8-INTERACTING PROTEIN1 is involved in autophagy-dependent vesicular trafficking of plastid proteins to the vacuole.Plant Cell264084–4101. 10.1105/tpc.114.129999
82
MizushimaN.YoshimoriT.OhsumiY. (2011). The role of Atg proteins in autophagosome formation.Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol.27107–132. 10.1146/annurev-cellbio-092910-154005
83
NawkarG. M.LeeE. S.ShelakeR. M.ParkJ. H.RyuS. W. (2018). Activation of the Transducers of Unfolded Protein Response in Plants.Front. Plant Sci.9:214. 10.3389/fpls.2018.00214
84
NicotA. S.Lo VersoF.RattiF.Pilot-StorckF.StreichenbergerN.SandriM.et al (2014). Phosphorylation of NBR1 by GSK3 modulates protein aggregation.Autophagy101036–1053. 10.4161/auto.28479
85
NodaN. N.KumetaH.NakatogawaH.SatooK.AdachiW.IshiiJ.et al (2008). Structural basis of target recognition by Atg8/LC3 during selective autophagy.Genes Cells131211–1218. 10.1111/j.1365-2443.2008.01238.x
86
NodaN. N.OhsumiY.InagakiF. (2010). Atg8-family interacting motif crucial for selective autophagy.FEBS Lett.5841379–1385. 10.1016/j.febslet.2010.01.018
87
NolanT. M.BrennanB.YangM.ChenJ.ZhangM.LiZ.et al (2017). Selective Autophagy of BES1 Mediated by DSK2 Balances Plant Growth and Survival.Plant Growth Regul.4133–46.e7. 10.1016/j.devcel.2017.03.013
88
OhyaY.OhsumiY.AnrakuY. (1986). Isolation and Characterization of Ca2+-sensitive Mutants of Saccharomyces cerevisiae.J. Gen. Appl. Microbiol.132979–988.
89
PankivS.AlemuE. A.BrechA.BruunJ. A.LamarkT.OvervatnA.et al (2010). FYCO1 is a Rab7 effector that binds to LC3 and PI3P to mediate microtubule plus end-directed vesicle transport.J. Cell Biol.188253–269. 10.1083/jcb.200907015
90
PankivS.JohansenT. (2010). FYCO1: linking autophagosomes to microtubule plus end-directing molecular motors.Autophagy6550–552. 10.4161/auto.6.4.11670
91
ParkE.WooJ.Dinesh-KumarS. P. (2014). Arabidopsis ATG4 cysteine proteases specificity toward ATG8 substrates.Autophagy10926–927. 10.4161/auto.28280
92
ParkM.SongK.ReichardtI.KimH.MayerU.StierhofY. D.et al (2013). Arabidopsis μ-adaptin subunit AP1M of adaptor protein complex 1 mediates late secretory and vacuolar traffic and is required for growth.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.11010318–10323. 10.1073/pnas.1300460110
93
PuY.LuoX.BasshamD. C. (2017). TOR-Dependent and -Independent Pathways Regulate Autophagy in Arabidopsis thaliana.Front. Plant Sci.8:1204. 10.3389/fpls.2017.01204
94
QinP.ZhangG.HuB.WuJ.ChenW.RenZ.et al (2021). Leaf-derived ABA regulates rice seed development via a transporter-mediated and temperature-sensitive mechanism.Sci. Adv.7:eabc8873. 10.1126/sciadv.abc8873
95
RancourD. M.ParkS.KnightS. D.BednarekS. Y. (2004). Plant UBX domain-containing protein 1, PUX1, regulates the oligomeric structure and activity of Arabidopsis CDC48.J. Biol. Chem.27954264–54274. 10.1074/jbc.M405498200
96
RomanovJ.WalczakM.IbiricuI.SchuchnerS.OgrisE.KraftC.et al (2012). Mechanism and functions of membrane binding by the Atg5-Atg12/Atg16 complex during autophagosome formation.EMBO J.314304–4317. 10.1038/emboj.2012.278
97
ShibataM.OikawaK.YoshimotoK.KondoM.ManoS. (2014). Highly oxidized peroxisomes are selectively degraded via autophagy in Arabidopsis.Plant Cell254967–4983. 10.1105/tpc.113.116947
98
SiahpooshM.SanchezD.SchlerethA.ScofieldG.FurbankR.van DongenJ. T.et al (2012). Modification of OsSUT1 gene expression modulates the salt response of rice Oryza sativa cv. Taipei 309.Plant Sci. Int. J. Exp. Biol.182101–111. 10.1016/j.plantsci.2011.01.001
99
SjøgaardI. M. Z.BressendorffS.PrestelA.KausikaS.OksbjergE.KragelundB. B.et al (2019). The transmembrane autophagy cargo receptors ATI1 and ATI2 interact with ATG8 through intrinsically disordered regions with distinct biophysical properties.Biochem. J.476449–465. 10.1042/BCJ20180748
100
StephaniM.PicchiantiL.GajicA.BeveridgeR.SkarwanE. (2020). A cross-kingdom conserved ER-phagy receptor maintains endoplasmic reticulum homeostasis during stress.Elife9:e58396. 10.7554/eLife.58396
101
StuderG.RempferC.WaterhouseA.GumiennyR.HaasJ.SchwedeT. (2020). QMEANDisCo-distance constraints applied on model quality estimation.Bioinformatics36:2647. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btaa058
102
SunD.WuR.LiP.YuL. (2020). Phase Separation in Regulation of Aggrephagy.J. Mol. Biol.432160–169. 10.1016/j.jmb.2019.06.026
103
SuoY.HuF.ZhuH.LiD.QiR.HuangJ.et al (2021). ArabidopsisBIG3 and BIG5 Redundantly Mediate Vesicle Trafficking in Arabidopsis.Biomolecules11:732. 10.3390/biom11050732
104
SuttangkakulA.LiF.ChungT.VierstraR. D. (2011). The ATG1/ATG13 protein kinase complex is both a regulator and a target of autophagic recycling in Arabidopsis.Plant Cell233761–3779. 10.1105/tpc.111.090993
105
SvenningS.LamarkT.KrauseK.JohansenT. (2011). Plant NBR1 is a selective autophagy substrate and a functional hybrid of the mammalian autophagic adapters NBR1 and p62/SQSTM1.Autophagy7993–1010. 10.4161/auto.7.9.16389
106
ThiemeC.Rojas-TrianaM.StecykE.SchudomaC.ZhangW. (2016). Corrigendum: endogenous Arabidopsis messenger RNAs transported to distant tissues.Nat. Plants2:16195. 10.1038/nplants.2016.195
107
TunyasuvunakoolK.AdlerJ.WuZ.GreenT.ZielinskiM. (2021). Highly accurate protein structure prediction for the human proteome.Nature596590–596. 10.1038/s41586-021-03828-1
108
VanheeC.ZapotocznyG.MasquelierD.GhislainM.BatokoH. (2011). The Arabidopsis multistress regulator TSPO is a heme binding membrane protein and a potential scavenger of porphyrins via an autophagy-dependent degradation mechanism.Plant Cell23785–805. 10.1105/tpc.110.081570
109
WadaS.HayashidaY.IzumiM.KurusuT.HanamataS.KannoK.et al (2015). Autophagy supports biomass production and nitrogen use efficiency at the vegetative stage in rice.Plant Physiol.16860–73. 10.1104/pp.15.00242
110
WangJ.ChenS.JiangN.LiN.WangX.LiZ.et al (2019). Spliceosome disassembly factors ILP1 and NTR1 promote miRNA biogenesis in Arabidopsis thaliana.Nucleic Acids Res.477886–7900. 10.1093/nar/gkz526
111
WangJ.QinH.ZhouS.WeiP.ZhangH.ZhouY.et al (2020). The Ubiquitin-Binding Protein OsDSK2a Mediates Seedling Growth and Salt Responses by Regulating Gibberellin Metabolism in Rice.Plant Cell32414–428. 10.1105/tpc.19.00593
112
WangR.LiuX.LiangS.GeQ.LiY.ShaoJ.et al (2015). A subgroup of MATE transporter genes regulates hypocotyl cell elongation in Arabidopsis.J. Exp. Bot.666327–6343. 10.1093/jxb/erv344
113
WaterhouseA.BertoniM.BienertS.StuderG.TaurielloG.GumiennyR.et al (2018). SWISS-MODEL: homology modelling of protein structures and complexes.Nucleic Acids Res.46W296–W303. 10.1093/nar/gky427
114
WooJ.ParkE.Dinesh-KumarS. P. (2014). Differential processing of Arabidopsis ubiquitin-like Atg8 autophagy proteins by Atg4 cysteine proteases.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.111863–868. 10.1073/pnas.1318207111
115
WywialE.SinghS. M. (2010). Identification and structural characterization of FYVE domain-containing proteins of Arabidopsis thaliana.BMC Plant Biol.10:157. 10.1186/1471-2229-10-157
116
XiaK.LiuT.OuyangJ.WangR.FanT.ZhangM. (2011). Genome-wide identification, classification, and expression analysis of autophagy-associated gene homologues in rice (Oryza sativa L.).DNA Res.18363–377. 10.1093/dnares/dsr024
117
XieQ.TzfadiaO.LevyM.WeithornE.Peled-ZehaviH.Van ParysT.et al (2016). hfAIM: a reliable bioinformatics approach for in silico genome-wide identification of autophagy-associated Atg8-interacting motifs in various organisms.Autophagy12876–887. 10.1080/15548627.2016.1147668
118
XuQ.ChenS.YunjuanR.ChenS.LiescheJ. (2018). Regulation of Sucrose Transporters and Phloem Loading in Response to Environmental Cues.J. Plant Physiol.176930–945. 10.1104/pp.17.01088
119
YangF.KimberlinA. N.ElowskyC. G.LiuY.Gonzalez-SolisA. (2019). A Plant Immune Receptor Degraded by Selective Autophagy.Mol. Plant12113–123. 10.1016/j.molp.2018.11.011
120
YeJ.TianW.ZhouM.ZhuQ.DuW.JinC. W. (2021). Improved Plant Nitrate Status Involves in Flowering Induction by Extended Photoperiod.Front. Plant Sci.12:629857. 10.3389/fpls.2021.629857
121
YoshimotoK.HanaokaH.SatoS.KatoT.TabataS.NodaT.et al (2004). Processing of ATG8s, ubiquitin-like proteins, and their deconjugation by ATG4s are essential for plant autophagy.Plant Cell162967–2983. 10.1105/tpc.104.025395
122
YuL.ChenY.ToozeS. A. (2018). Autophagy pathway: cellular and molecular mechanisms.Autophagy14207–215. 10.1080/15548627.2017.1378838
123
ZhanN.WangC.ChenL.YangH.FengJ.GongX.et al (2018). S-Nitrosylation Targets GSNO Reductase for Selective Autophagy during Hypoxia Responses in Plants.Mol. Cell71142–154.e6.
124
ZhangL.SongH.LiB.WangM.DiD.LinX.et al (2021). Induction of S-nitrosoglutathione reductase protects root growth from ammonium toxicity by regulating potassium homeostasis in Arabidopsis and rice.J. Exp. Bot.724548–4564. 10.1093/jxb/erab140
125
ZhangY.ChenZ. (2020). Broad and Complex Roles of NBR1-Mediated Selective Autophagy in Plant Stress Responses.Cells9:2562. 10.3390/cells9122562
126
ZhaoD.ZhengY.YangL.YaoZ.ChengJ.ZhangF.et al (2021). The transcription factor AtGLK1 acts upstream of MYBL2 to genetically regulate sucrose-induced anthocyanin biosynthesis in Arabidopsis.BMC Plant Biol.21:242. 10.1186/s12870-021-03033-2
127
ZhaoJ.PengP.SchmitzR. J.DeckerA. D.TaxF. E. (2002). Two putative BIN2 substrates are nuclear components of brassinosteroid signaling.Plant Physiol.1301221–1229. 10.1104/pp.102.010918
128
ZhengL.HongP.GuoX.LiY.XieL. (2020). Rice stripe virus p2 Colocalizes and Interacts with Cajal Bodies and Its Domains in Plant Cells.Biomed Res. Int.2020:5182164. 10.1155/2020/5182164
129
ZhouJ.WangJ.ChengY.ChiY. J.FanB.YuJ. Q.et al (2013). NBR1-mediated selective autophagy targets insoluble ubiquitinated protein aggregates in plant stress responses.PLoS Genet.9:e1003196. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1003196
130
ZhouJ.WangJ.YuJ. Q.ChenZ. (2014). Role and regulation of autophagy in heat stress responses of tomato plants.Front. Plant Sci.5:174. 10.3389/fpls.2014.00174
131
ZhuJ. K. (2016). Abiotic Stress Signaling and Responses in Plants.Cell167313–324. 10.1016/j.cell.2016.08.029
132
ZhuangX.JiangL. (2014). Autophagosome biogenesis in plants: roles of SH3P2.Autophagy10704–705. 10.4161/auto.28060
133
ZhuangX.WangH.LamS. K.GaoC.WangX.CaiY.et al (2013). A BAR-domain protein SH3P2, which binds to phosphatidylinositol 3-phosphate and ATG8, regulates autophagosome formation in Arabidopsis.Plant Cell254596–4615. 10.1105/tpc.113.118307
134
ZolmanB.BartelB. (2004). An Arabidopsis indole-3-butyric acid-response mutant defective in PEROXIN6, an apparent ATPase implicated in peroxisomal function.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.1011786–1791. 10.1073/pnas.0304368101
Summary
Keywords
autophagy, ATG8, ATG8-interacting motif (AIM), ubiquitin-interacting motif (UIM), selective autophagy receptor (SAR)
Citation
Liu W, Liu Z, Mo Z, Guo S, Liu Y and Xie Q (2021) ATG8-Interacting Motif: Evolution and Function in Selective Autophagy of Targeting Biological Processes. Front. Plant Sci. 12:783881. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2021.783881
Received
27 September 2021
Accepted
28 October 2021
Published
29 November 2021
Volume
12 - 2021
Edited by
Caiji Gao, South China Normal University, China
Reviewed by
Changle Ma, Shandong Normal University, China; Taijoon Chung, Pusan National University, South Korea
Updates

Check for updates
Copyright
© 2021 Liu, Liu, Mo, Guo, Liu and Xie.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Qingjun Xie, qjxie@scau.edu.cn
†These authors have contributed equally to this work
This article was submitted to Plant Cell Biology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Plant Science
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.