SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Please note: Wiley-Blackwell are not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing material) should be directed to the New Phytologist Central Office.

FilenameFormatSizeDescription
nph12408-sup-0001-figS1-S12_TabS1-9_MethodS1.pdfapplication/PDF8781K

Fig. S1 Schematic diagram of the five parameters analyzed for comparison of reactive oxygen species (ROS) generated by the various elicitors. See 'Materials and Methods' for more details.

Fig. S2 Representative reactive oxygen species (ROS) curves from several datasets presented in Table 1.

Fig. S3 Arabidopsis is blind to flgII-28.

Fig. S4 Both flg22 and flgII-28 elicit the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) on tomato cv ‘Roter Gnom’.

Fig. S5 Transient expression of FLS2 leads to stable heterologous expression of FLS2 proteins in Nicotiana benthamiana.

Fig. S6 Transcript abundance of both FLS2 genes is reduced in FLS2-VIGS (virus-induced gene silenced) tomato plants.

Fig. S7 Pretreatment with flg22ES4326 leads to increased growth in a plant protection assay on tomato cv ‘Rio Grande’.

Fig. S8 Diversity in motility in vitro exists in the Pseudomonas syringae species complex.

Fig. S9 The different alleles of fliC do not lead to varying growth on tomato before the onset of necrosis symptoms.

Fig. S10 Similar results to those shown in Figs 7 and 8 (infiltration inoculation) are also observed following spray inoculation.

Fig. S11 Disease symptoms of Arabidopsis following infection with the strains used in Fig. 8.

Fig. S12 Growth of second isolates of the DC3000∆fliC strain complemented with the different alleles of fliC.

Table S1 Primers used in this study

Table S2 Alleles of flg22 and flgII-28 present in Pseudomonas syringae sensu lato species complex

Table S3 Difference in reactive oxygen species (ROS) response of Solanaceae plants shown in Fig. 2 to either the T1 allele or the K40 allele of flgII-28

Table S4 Difference in reactive oxygen species (ROS) response of Solanaceae plants shown in Fig. 2 to either the T1 allele or theCol338 allele of flgII-28

Table S5 Difference in reactive oxygen species (ROS) response of other Solanaceae plants to either the T1 allele or the K40 allele of flgII-28

Table S6 Difference in reactive oxygen species (ROS) response of other Solanaceae plants to either the T1 allele or theCol338 allele of flgII-28

Table S7 Difference in reactive oxygen species (ROS) response of Solanaceae plants shown in Fig. 2 to either the T1 allele or theCol338 allele of flg22

Table S8 Difference in reactive oxygen species (ROS) response of other Solanaceae plants to either the T1 allele or theCol338 allele of flg22

Table S9 Analysis of the reactive oxygen species (ROS) response of either Arabidopsis thaliana or tomato to either flg22DC3000 or flg22ES4326 shown in Figs 5(a,b)

Methods S1 Bayesian analysis of dynamics of reactive oxygen species, callose deposition, fls2 protein detection and quantitative real-time reverse transcription PCR.