Structural requirements of Rhizobium chitolipooligosaccharides for uptake and bioactivity in legume roots as revealed by synthetic analogs and fluorescent probes.

Rhizobium chitolipooligosaccharides (CLOSs) are heterogeneous fatty acylated N-acetyl glucosamine oligomers with variations in both the polar (hydrophilic) oligosaccharide head group and the non-polar (hydrophobic) fatty acyl chain. They trigger root hair deformation and cortical cell divisions in legume roots during development of the nitrogen-fixing root-nodule symbiosis. It has been proposed that only certain unique molecular species of CLOSs made by a particular rhizobia can elicit these responses on the corresponding legume host, suggesting that receptor-mediated perception of CLOSs serves as a basis of symbiotic specificity. We evaluated the relative symbiotic importance of the hydrophilic and hydrophobic structural domains of CLOSs by comparing the biological activities of CLOSs from wild type R. leguminosarum bv. trifolii ANU843 with that of various synthetic analogs. These tests were performed in axenic bioassays on the compatible symbiotic host, white clover (Trifolium repens) and the incompatible non-host legume, alfalfa (Medicago sativa). Fluorochrome-tagged derivatives of the native CLOSs and the analogs were also prepared in order to evaluate the uptake and localization patterns of these molecules within host root cells. The results indicate a direct link between uptake and biological activities of Rhizobium CLOSs on legume roots. The smallest CLOS analog taken up and biologically active on white clover and alfalfa was a N-fatty acylglucosamine, without an essential requirement of oligomerization, fatty N-acyl unsaturation, or acetate/sulfate functionalization. This suggests that N-fattyacylglucosamine is the common minimum structure required and sufficient for uptake and biological activity of CLOS glycolipids in these legumes, and that the various specific modifications of its polar head group and hydrophobic tail modulate its inherent ability to further express these activities, thus influencing which legumes are capable of responding to CLOSs rather than dictating their biological activities per se.