Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (4)
Year of publication
- 2017 (4) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (4)
Language
- English (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (4)
Keywords
- Architecture (1)
- FRUITFULL (1)
- MADS-box transcription factor (1)
- SAUR (1)
- auxin (1)
- branching (1)
- growth (1)
- hormones (1)
- light response (1)
Institute
- Institut für Biochemie und Biologie (4) (remove)
Winter cereals require prolonged cold to transition from vegetative to reproductive development. This process, referred to as vernalization, has been extensively studied in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana). In Arabidopsis, a key flowering repressor called FLOWERING LOCUS C (FLC) quantitatively controls the vernalization requirement. By contrast, in cereals, the vernalization response is mainly regulated by the VERNALIZATION genes, VRN1 and VRN2. Here, we characterize ODDSOC2, a recently identified FLC ortholog in monocots, knowing that it belongs to the FLC lineage. By studying its expression in a diverse set of Brachypodium accessions, we find that it is a good predictor of the vernalization requirement. Analyses of transgenics demonstrated that BdODDSOC2 functions as a vernalization-regulated flowering repressor. In most Brachypodium accessions BdODDSOC2 is down-regulated by cold, and in one of the winter accessions in which this down-regulation was evident, BdODDSOC2 responded to cold before BdVRN1. When stably down-regulated, the mechanism is associated with spreading H3K27me3 modifications at the BdODDSOC2 chromatin. Finally, homoeolog-specific gene expression analyses identify TaAGL33 and its splice variant TaAGL22 as the FLC orthologs in wheat (Triticum aestivum) behaving most similar to Brachypodium ODDSOC2. Overall, our study suggests that ODDSOC2 is not only phylogenetically related to FLC in eudicots but also functions as a flowering repressor in the vernalization pathway of Brachypodium and likely other temperate grasses. These insights could prove useful in breeding efforts to refine the vernalization requirement of temperate cereals and adapt varieties to changing climates.
The origin of flowers has puzzled plant biologists ever since Darwin referred to their sudden appearance in the fossil record as an abominable mystery. Flowers are considered to be an assembly of protective, attractive, and reproductive male and female leaf-like organs. Their origin cannot be understood by a morphological comparison to gymnosperms, their closest relatives, which develop separate male or female cones. Despite these morphological differences, gymnosperms and angiosperms possess a similar genetic toolbox consisting of phylogenetically related MADS domain proteins. Using ancestral MADS domain protein reconstruction, we trace the evolution of organ identity quartets along the stem lineage of crown angiosperms. We provide evidence that current floral quartets specifying male organ identity, which consist of four types of subunits, evolved from ancestral complexes of two types of subunits through gene duplication and integration of SEPALLATA proteins just before the origin of flowering plants. Our results suggest that protein interaction changes underlying this compositional shift were the result of a gradual and reversible evolutionary trajectory. Modeling shows that such compositional changes may have facilitated the evolution of the perfect, bisexual flower.
MADS-domain transcription factors are well known for their roles in plant development and regulate sets of downstream genes that have been uncovered by high-throughput analyses. A considerable number of these targets are predicted to function in hormone responses or responses to environmental stimuli, suggesting that there is a close link between developmental and environmental regulators of plant growth and development. Here, we show that the Arabidopsis MADS-domain factor FRUITFULL (FUL) executes several functions in addition to its noted role in fruit development. Among the direct targets of FUL, we identified SMALL AUXIN UPREGULATED RNA 10 (SAUR10), a growth regulator that is highly induced by a combination of auxin and brassinosteroids and in response to reduced R:FR light. Interestingly, we discovered that SAUR10 is repressed by FUL in stems and inflorescence branches. SAUR10 is specifically expressed at the abaxial side of these branches and this localized activity is influenced by hormones, light conditions and by FUL, which has an effect on branch angle. Furthermore, we identified a number of other genes involved in hormone pathways and light signalling as direct targets of FUL in the stem, demonstrating a connection between developmentally and environmentally regulated growth programs.
Floral organ identities in plants are specified by the combinatorial action of homeotic master regulatory transcription factors. However, how these factors achieve their regulatory specificities is still largely unclear. Genome-wide in vivo DNA binding data show that homeotic MADS domain proteins recognize partly distinct genomic regions, suggesting that DNA binding specificity contributes to functional differences of homeotic protein complexes. We used in vitro systematic evolution of ligands by exponential enrichment followed by high-throughput DNA sequencing (SELEX-seq) on several floral MADS domain protein homo-and heterodimers to measure their DNA binding specificities. We show that specification of reproductive organs is associated with distinct binding preferences of a complex formed by SEPALLATA3 and AGAMOUS. Binding specificity is further modulated by different binding site spacing preferences. Combination of SELEX-seq and genome-wide DNA binding data allows differentiation between targets in specification of reproductive versus perianth organs in the flower. We validate the importance of DNA binding specificity for organ-specific gene regulation by modulating promoter activity through targeted mutagenesis. Our study shows that intrafamily protein interactions affect DNA binding specificity of floral MADS domain proteins. Differential DNA binding of MADS domain protein complexes plays a role in the specificity of target gene regulation.