Volume 9, Issue 8, Pages (August 2016)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Potassium Transporter KUP7 Is Involved in K+ Acquisition and Translocation in Arabidopsis Root under K+-Limited Conditions  Min Han, Wei Wu, Wei-Hua Wu,
Advertisements

A Histone H3 Lysine-27 Methyltransferase Complex Represses Lateral Root Formation in Arabidopsis thaliana  Gu Xiaofeng , Xu Tongda , He Yuehui   Molecular.
Volume 6, Issue 6, Pages (November 2013)
Volume 7, Issue 9, Pages (September 2014)
A Dual-Function Transcription Factor, AtYY1, Is a Novel Negative Regulator of the Arabidopsis ABA Response Network  Tian Li, Xiu-Yun Wu, Hui Li, Jian-Hui.
Volume 8, Issue 1, Pages (January 2015)
Jun-Ho Ha, Hyo-Jun Lee, Jae-Hoon Jung, Chung-Mo Park 
Volume 11, Issue 2, Pages (February 2018)
Volume 23, Issue 20, Pages (October 2013)
Volume 9, Issue 6, Pages (June 2016)
Volume 10, Issue 11, Pages (November 2017)
Volume 9, Issue 1, Pages (January 2016)
A Dual-Function Transcription Factor, AtYY1, Is a Novel Negative Regulator of the Arabidopsis ABA Response Network  Tian Li, Xiu-Yun Wu, Hui Li, Jian-Hui.
Kim Min Jung , Ciani Silvano , Schachtman Daniel P.   Molecular Plant 
Potassium Transporter KUP7 Is Involved in K+ Acquisition and Translocation in Arabidopsis Root under K+-Limited Conditions  Min Han, Wei Wu, Wei-Hua Wu,
Volume 6, Issue 5, Pages (September 2013)
Volume 43, Issue 5, Pages (September 2011)
Volume 10, Issue 12, Pages (December 2017)
Volume 10, Issue 6, Pages (June 2017)
Volume 7, Issue 9, Pages (September 2014)
Volume 23, Issue 18, Pages (September 2013)
Liyuan Chen, Anne Bernhardt, JooHyun Lee, Hanjo Hellmann 
Volume 8, Issue 5, Pages (May 2015)
Volume 7, Issue 9, Pages (September 2014)
Volume 10, Issue 7, Pages (July 2017)
BZR1 Positively Regulates Freezing Tolerance via CBF-Dependent and CBF- Independent Pathways in Arabidopsis  Hui Li, Keyi Ye, Yiting Shi, Jinkui Cheng,
The WUSCHEL Related Homeobox Protein WOX7 Regulates the Sugar Response of Lateral Root Development in Arabidopsis thaliana  Danyu Kong, Yueling Hao, Hongchang.
Volume 11, Issue 4, Pages (April 2018)
Volume 10, Issue 11, Pages (November 2017)
Phytochrome Signaling in Green Arabidopsis Seedlings: Impact Assessment of a Mutually Negative phyB–PIF Feedback Loop  Pablo Leivar, Elena Monte, Megan.
Volume 9, Issue 1, Pages (January 2016)
Volume 9, Issue 7, Pages (July 2016)
Volume 9, Issue 9, Pages (September 2016)
The Arabidopsis Transcription Factor AtTCP15 Regulates Endoreduplication by Modulating Expression of Key Cell-cycle Genes  Li Zi-Yu , Li Bin , Dong Ai-Wu.
Arabidopsis MSBP1 Is Activated by HY5 and HYH and Is Involved in Photomorphogenesis and Brassinosteroid Sensitivity Regulation  Shi Qiu-Ming , Yang Xi.
Volume 25, Issue 11, Pages (June 2015)
Volume 3, Issue 3, Pages (March 2013)
Volume 21, Issue 8, Pages (August 2014)
Repression of MYBL2 by Both microRNA858a and HY5 Leads to the Activation of Anthocyanin Biosynthetic Pathway in Arabidopsis  Yulong Wang, Yiqing Wang,
AtPRMT5 Regulates Shoot Regeneration through Mediating Histone H4R3 Dimethylation on KRPs and Pre-mRNA Splicing of RKP in Arabidopsis  Hui Liu, Xu Ma,
Volume 9, Issue 10, Pages (October 2016)
Volume 9, Issue 9, Pages (September 2016)
Yi Song, Chuangwei Yang, Shan Gao, Wei Zhang, Lin Li, Benke Kuai 
Arabidopsis WRKY45 Interacts with the DELLA Protein RGL1 to Positively Regulate Age-Triggered Leaf Senescence  Ligang Chen, Shengyuan Xiang, Yanli Chen,
Arabidopsis NF-YCs Mediate the Light-Controlled Hypocotyl Elongation via Modulating Histone Acetylation  Yang Tang, Xuncheng Liu, Xu Liu, Yuge Li, Keqiang.
Turnip Yellow Mosaic Virus P69 Interacts with and Suppresses GLK Transcription Factors to Cause Pale-Green Symptoms in Arabidopsis  Fangrui Ni, Liang.
Volume 15, Issue 6, Pages (December 2008)
Xiang Han, Hao Yu, Rongrong Yuan, Yan Yang, Fengying An, Genji Qin
HOS1 Facilitates the Phytochrome B-Mediated Inhibition of PIF4 Function during Hypocotyl Growth in Arabidopsis  Ju-Heon Kim, Hyo-Jun Lee, Jae-Hoon Jung,
BZR1 Interacts with HY5 to Mediate Brassinosteroid- and Light-Regulated Cotyledon Opening in Arabidopsis in Darkness  Qian-Feng Li, Jun-Xian He  Molecular.
Brassinosteroids Regulate the Differential Growth of Arabidopsis Hypocotyls through Auxin Signaling Components IAA19 and ARF7  Xiao-Yi Zhou, Li Song,
Volume 5, Issue 6, Pages (November 2012)
PtrHB7, a class III HD-Zip Gene, Plays a Critical Role in Regulation of Vascular Cambium Differentiation in Populus  Yingying Zhu, Dongliang Song, Jiayan.
Volume 10, Issue 9, Pages (September 2017)
Volume 7, Issue 8, Pages (August 2014)
A Conserved Interaction between SKIP and SMP1/2 Aids in Recruiting the Second-Step Splicing Factors to the Spliceosome in Arabidopsis  Lei Liu, Fangming.
Volume 24, Issue 13, Pages (July 2014)
DRN and DRNL regulate STM expression via binding to a conserved promoter motif. DRN and DRNL regulate STM expression via binding to a conserved promoter.
Volume 25, Issue 8, Pages (April 2015)
Arabidopsis ABF3 and ABF4 Transcription Factors Act with the NF-YC Complex to Regulate SOC1 Expression and Mediate Drought-Accelerated Flowering  Keumbi.
Volume 25, Issue 7, Pages e4 (November 2018)
Volume 24, Issue 16, Pages (August 2014)
Volume 10, Issue 4, Pages (April 2017)
Volume 10, Issue 6, Pages (June 2017)
DELLA Proteins Promote Anthocyanin Biosynthesis via Sequestering MYBL2 and JAZ Suppressors of the MYB/bHLH/WD40 Complex in Arabidopsis thaliana  Ye Xie,
Volume 8, Issue 2, Pages (February 2015)
Volume 11, Issue 2, Pages (February 2018)
Wang Long , Mai Yan-Xia , Zhang Yan-Chun , Luo Qian , Yang Hong-Quan  
The bHLH Transcription Factors MYC2, MYC3, and MYC4 Are Required for Jasmonate- Mediated Inhibition of Flowering in Arabidopsis  Houping Wang, Yang Li,
Volume 11, Issue 7, Pages (July 2018)
Presentation transcript:

Volume 9, Issue 8, Pages 1197-1209 (August 2016) Conservation and Diversification of the SHR-SCR-SCL23 Regulatory Network in the Development of the Functional Endodermis in Arabidopsis Shoots  Eun Kyung Yoon, Souvik Dhar, Mi-Hyun Lee, Jae Hyo Song, Shin Ae Lee, Gyuree Kim, Sejeong Jang, Ji Won Choi, Jeong-Eun Choe, Jeong Hoe Kim, Myeong Min Lee, Jun Lim  Molecular Plant  Volume 9, Issue 8, Pages 1197-1209 (August 2016) DOI: 10.1016/j.molp.2016.06.007 Copyright © 2016 The Author Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 Protein Complexes of SHR and SCL23 Regulate Transcription of SCL23. (A and B) Expression of the ProSCL23:GUS transcriptional fusion in 10-day-old WT (A) and shr-2 (B) shoots. Scale bars represent 1 cm. (C) qRT–PCR of SCL23 mRNA abundance in WT and shr-2 shoots. The value for WT is set to 1 and the value relative to WT is shown. (D) Arabidopsis protoplast transient expression assays. Schematic representation of the effector and reporter plasmids is illustrated. The reporter consists of the SCL23 promoter (ProSCL23) and a firefly luciferase coding sequence (LUC). The effector plasmids have the coding regions of either SHR or SCL23 under the control of the cauliflower mosaic virus (CaMV) 35S promoter. The relative LUC activity was measured, when SHR alone or SHR + SCL23 were transfected. The background value with the GUS effector is set to 1 as the control, and the values relative to the control are shown. (E) ChIP–PCR assays for SHR binding to the SCL23 promoter with ProSHR:SHR-GFP in shr-2. The representative SCL23 promoter regions from the translational start are indicated, and the known SHR-binding region in the SCR promoter (ProSCR) is included as a positive control. Regions exhibiting prominent enrichment of SHR binding to the SCL23 promoter regions, compared with the positive control (ProSCR), are highlighted in red. (F) ChIP–PCR for SHR binding to the SCL23 promoter with ProSHR:SHR-GFP in WT and scl23-1 shoots. The enrichment of SHR binding to the three prominent fragments in (E) was considerably reduced in the scl23-1 background. Error bars indicate mean ± SE from three biological replicates. Statistically significant differences were determined by Student's t-test (*p < 0.05). Molecular Plant 2016 9, 1197-1209DOI: (10.1016/j.molp.2016.06.007) Copyright © 2016 The Author Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 Relationships of SHR, SCR, and SCL23 in the SHR-SCR-SCL23 Network. (A–F) Phenotypic analysis of 20-day-old shr-2 (A), shr-2 scl23-1 (B), scl23-1 (C), scr-3 (D), scr-3 scl23-1 (E), and wild-type (WT) (F) plants. Scale bar represents 1 cm. (G) Transient expression assays for the interactions of SHR, SCR, and SCL23 with the SCL23 promoter. The effector and reporter plasmids are schematically shown. The relative LUC activity was determined, when SCR alone, SCL23 alone, both SCR and SCL23, or the three GRAS TFs were transfected. The background value with the GUS effector is set to 1 as the control, and the values relative to the control are indicated. Error bars indicate mean ± SE from three biological replicates. Statistically significant differences were determined by Student's t-test (*p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01). Molecular Plant 2016 9, 1197-1209DOI: (10.1016/j.molp.2016.06.007) Copyright © 2016 The Author Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 Phenotypic Analysis of SCL23-OX and SCL23-SRDX Shoots. (A–C) 20-day-old WT (A), SCL23-OX (B), and SCL23-SRDX (C) plants. Scale bar represents 1 cm. (D) Plant height of WT, SCL23-OX, and SCL23-SRDX plants at different days post germination (dpg). (E) Length of WT, SCL23-OX, and SCL23-SRDX leaves at 20 dpg. (F) Length of WT, SCL23-OX, and SCL23-SRDX petioles at 20 dpg. Error bars indicate mean ± SE (n = 6). Molecular Plant 2016 9, 1197-1209DOI: (10.1016/j.molp.2016.06.007) Copyright © 2016 The Author Terms and Conditions

Figure 4 SCL23 Negatively Regulates Transcription of SHR in the Shoot. (A) qRT–PCR of SHR mRNA abundance in WT, SCL23-OX, and SCL23-SRDX shoots. The expression level of SHR in WT is set to one and the values relative to WT are shown. (B and C) Expression of the ProSHR:GUS transcriptional fusion in 10-day-old WT (B) and shr-2 (C) leaves. Scale bars represent 100 μm. (D) Transient expression assay for the interaction of SCL23 and the SHR promoter. Schematic illustration for the effector and reporter plasmids is shown. Addition of SCL23 alone reduced transcription of SHR, whereas SHR alone or SCR alone had nearly no influence on SHR expression. The background value is set to 1 as the control, and the values relative to the control are indicated. (E) ChIP–PCR assay for SCL23 binding to the SHR promoter. The representative SHR promoter regions from the translational start are indicated, and the SHR gene body region (SHR) is included as a negative control. Prominent enrichment of SCL23 binding to the SHR promoter fragment is shown in red. Error bars indicate mean ± SE from three biological replicates. Statistically significant differences were determined by Student's t-test (*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01). Molecular Plant 2016 9, 1197-1209DOI: (10.1016/j.molp.2016.06.007) Copyright © 2016 The Author Terms and Conditions

Figure 5 SCL23 Can Restrict Intercellular Movement of SHR in the Hypocotyl. (A) Localization of the SHR-GFP recombinant protein in the endodermis of the WT hypocotyl. The arrowhead indicates the nuclear localization of SHR-GFP in the hypocotyl endodermis. (B) Localization of SHR-GFP in the SCL23-OX hypocotyl. No signal is detected in the endodermis. The epidermis (Ep), cortex (Co), and endodermis (En) layers are indicated. Molecular Plant 2016 9, 1197-1209DOI: (10.1016/j.molp.2016.06.007) Copyright © 2016 The Author Terms and Conditions

Figure 6 Characterization of Hypocotyl Gravitropic Responses and Amyloplast Sedimentation. (A–E) Gravitropic responses of WT (A), shr-2 (B), scr-3 (C), SCL23-OX (D), and SCL23-SRDX (E) hypocotyls. Dark-grown seedlings at 3 dpg were rotated by an angle of 90° and incubated for 2 days. Scale bar represents 0.5 cm. (F–J) Amyloplast staining of WT (F), shr-2 (G), scr-3 (H), SCL23-OX (I), and SCL23-SRDX (J) hypocotyls. In response to the change of the gravity vector, amyloplasts precipitated in the bottom of the endodermis in the WT hypocotyl. By contrast, defects in amyloplast sedimentation were found in shr-2, scr-3, SCL23-OX, and SCL23-SRDX hypocotyls. Scale bar represents 100 μm. The arrow indicates the direction of gravity (g). The epidermis (Ep), cortex (Co), endodermis (En), and mutant (M) layers are indicated. Molecular Plant 2016 9, 1197-1209DOI: (10.1016/j.molp.2016.06.007) Copyright © 2016 The Author Terms and Conditions

Figure 7 Characterization of the Hypocotyl Radial Pattern. (A–G) Transverse sections of the hypocotyls of WT (A), shr-2 (B), scr-3 (C), SCL23-OX (D), SCL23-SRDX (E), scr-3 scl23-1 (F), and triple-mutant (shr-2 scr-3 scl23-1) (G) seedlings. Both SCL23-OX and SCL23-SRDX hypocotyls contain three layers of the ground tissue (one endodermis and double cortex). Scale bar represents 40 μm. (H–N) Suberin staining of the hypocotyls of WT (H), shr-2 (I), scr-3 (J), SCL23-OX (K), SCL23-SRDX (L), scr-3 scl23-1 (M), and triple-mutant (shr-2 scr-3 scl23-1) (N) seedlings. The red arrowheads indicate positive cells of the innermost ground tissue by suberin staining. Unlike those in the shr-2 hypocotyl, both SCL23-OX and SCL23-SRDX hypocotyls have the endodermis with positive cells to suberin staining. Scale bar represents 25 μm. The epidermis (Ep), cortex (Co), endodermis (En), and mutant (M) layers are indicated. Molecular Plant 2016 9, 1197-1209DOI: (10.1016/j.molp.2016.06.007) Copyright © 2016 The Author Terms and Conditions

Figure 8 A Schematic Model for the Molecular Interactions of SHR, SCR, and SCL23 in the Development of the Shoot Endodermis. The master regulator SHR directly activates expression of both SCL23 and SCR in the endodermis and its equivalent tissues. When ectopically overexpressed, SCL23 can negatively regulate transcription of SHR. Both SCL23 and SCR interact with SHR, resulting in the restriction of SHR movement. SCR also can activate SCL23 expression. Based on what we know to date, SCR and SCL23 interact with each other at protein levels. Activation of SCR and SCL23 depend on their own presence in protein complexes, indicating autoregulation. Transcriptional controls (TC) are indicated in blue, and protein–protein interactions (PPI) are depicted in red. Arrows represent positive regulation, while bars denote negative regulation. Molecular Plant 2016 9, 1197-1209DOI: (10.1016/j.molp.2016.06.007) Copyright © 2016 The Author Terms and Conditions