| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
|
First published online August 26, 2005; 10.1105/tpc.105.033415 © 2005 American Society of Plant Biologists
The Tomato Aux/IAA Transcription Factor IAA9 Is Involved in Fruit Development and Leaf Morphogenesis
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONRESULTSDISCUSSIONMETHODSREFERENCES |
|---|
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONRESULTSDISCUSSIONMETHODSREFERENCES |
|---|
). While it is clear that auxin plays a pivotal role in plant growth and development, the molecular effectors by which this hormone exerts its effect are still relatively unknown. For example, in the process of fruit set, the onset of ovary development into fruit and its subsequent development are naturally triggered by signals from successful fertilization. These processes can be initiated in the absence of pollination and fertilization by exogenous auxin or auxin transport inhibitors (Gustafson, 1937; Beyer and Quebedeaux, 1974) or by the ovary-specific expression of Agrobacterium tumefaciens indoleacetamide monoxygenase (iaaM) or root loci B (rolB) genes, which confer higher auxin production or increased auxin sensitivity, respectively (Ficcadenti et al., 1999; Carmi et al., 2003). The molecular mediators by which auxin impacts this process are still unknown.
The recent discovery that the F-box protein Transport Inhibitor Response1 functions as an auxin receptor represents a major breakthrough (Dharmasiri et al., 2005; Kepinski and Leyser, 2005) in understanding how auxin mediates cellular responses. It has been known for a decade that auxin signaling operates by recruiting specific transcription factors, leading to the expression of downstream genes that perform the required responses (Vogler and Kuhlemeier, 2003). The auxin/indole-3-acetic acid (Aux/IAA) and auxin response factor (ARF) families of transcription factors have been shown to be instrumental in auxin-dependent transcriptional regulation. Aux/IAA proteins are short-lived transcription factors that share four highly conserved domains. Domain I contains a functionally characterized transcriptional repressor motif (Tiwari et al., 2004), while domain II interacts with a component of the ubiquitin-proteasome protein degradation pathway shown to be essential for auxin signaling. Domains III and IV act as C-terminal dimerization domains, mediating homodimerization and heterodimerization among Aux/IAA family members and dimerization with similar domains found in ARFs (Kim et al., 1997; Ulmasov et al., 1997; Ouellet et al., 2001). ARFs are transcriptional activators and repressors that bind with specificity to TGTCTC auxin-responsive cis-acting elements found in promoters of primary/early auxin-responsive genes, including members of the Aux/IAA family (Ulmasov et al., 1997).
Aux/IAA genes are expressed in distinct spatial and temporal patterns, contributing to the diversity of auxin responses in different plant tissues, organs, and developmental stages (Abel et al., 1995). Screens for Arabidopsis thaliana mutants with altered auxin response or morphology have identified mutations in 10 different Aux/IAA genes: IAA1/AXR5 (Park et al., 2002; Yang et al., 2004), IAA3/SHY2 (Tian and Reed, 1999), IAA6/SHY1 (Kim et al., 1996), IAA7/AXR2 (Nagpal et al., 2000), IAA12/BDL (Hamann et al., 2002), IAA14/SLR (Fukaki et al., 2002), IAA17/AXR3 (Rouse et al., 1998), IAA18 (Reed, 2001), IAA19/MSG2 (Tatematsu et al., 2004), and IAA28 (Rogg et al., 2001). All of these primary mutations in Aux/IAA genes were found in the highly conserved domain II, which is responsible for protein degradation. The mutations stabilize the proteins, resulting in gain-of-function phenotypes. Several revertants have been shown to have mutations in other domains, affecting the capacity of the hyperstable proteins to function (Rouse et al., 1998). The aux/iaa mutants exhibit a variety of auxin-related developmental phenotypes, including altered phototropism/gravitropism, root formation, apical dominance, stem/hypocotyl elongation, leaf expansion, and leaf formation in the dark. However, because the stabilization caused by these mutations may not mimic regulatory events actually occurring in wild-type plants, accurate determination of the physiological significance of Aux/IAA proteins would benefit from the study of loss-of-function mutants. Unfortunately, the few Aux/IAA null mutations that have been characterized display subtle or nonscorable phenotypes, probably due to functional redundancy or to feedback regulatory loops that enable the mutant plants to compensate for absence of a particular Aux/IAA protein.
We report here on the functional characterization of IAA9, a member of subfamily IV of the tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) Aux/IAA gene family for which, to our knowledge, no mutation has been described so far. Phenotypes and molecular analyses of the downregulation of IAA9 in transgenic tomatoes indicated that the IAA9 protein is a pivotal mediator of auxin in the process of fruit set and leaf morphogenesis. The evidence provided by this work supports the hypothesis that the IAA9 protein acts to repress the auxin response pathway.
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONRESULTSDISCUSSIONMETHODSREFERENCES |
|---|
). The IAA9 cDNA clone was found to correspond to a previously isolated 301-bp partial tomato clone (Nebenfuhr et al., 2000), initially named IAA4 (GenBank accession number AF022015). The complete coding sequence (1047 bases), encoding a putative protein of 349 amino acids, was then isolated and renamed IAA9 to comply with the numbering retained for the Arabidopsis Aux/IAA genes. The derived protein comprises the four conserved domains characteristic of the Aux/IAA gene family, domains I to IV, and several nuclear localization signal (NLS) sequences (Figure 1). Phylogenetic analysis was conducted to assess the relationships between tomato IAA9 and Aux/IAA genes from Arabidopsis and other plant species. The phylogenetic tree shown in Figure 2 suggests that Aux/IAA proteins can be grouped into four subfamilies. Subfamilies II, III, and IV are well defined, and their existence was confirmed by both PAUP and ProDom analyses (Servant et al., 2002). Subfamily I includes up to six subgroups, each of them bearing at least one specific domain. Tomato IAA9 falls into subfamily IV along with sequences from grape (Vitis vinifera), cucumber (Cucumis sativus), Zinnia elegans, and Arabidopsis. Three other tomato Aux/IAA proteins, highly similar to their putative Arabidopsis homologs, fall into three of the four main subfamilies. Subfamily IV is clearly distinguishable from other Aux/IAA subfamilies, as its members are longer (typically >300 amino acids) than members of all other subfamilies (
200 amino acids) and typically contain 40 to 60 additional amino acids N-terminal to domain I and >50 amino acids between domains I and II (Figure 1). This N-terminal region unique to subfamily IV is well conserved among different plant species (shaded in gray in Figure 1), which suggests conserved function. The predicted tomato IAA9 protein shares 97% identity with potato (Solanum tuberosum) Aux/IAA and 92% similarity with tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) IAA9. It also shares 80, 78, 74, and 70% similarity with grape Aux/IAA, cucumber IAA2, Z. elegans auxin-responsive protein (ARP), and Arabidopsis IAA9, respectively. Tomato IAA9 contains several highly conserved amino acid sequence motifs (Figure 1) unique to subfamily IV such as the short (Pxx)2 sequences located between domains I and II, which are indicative of polyproline II conformations.
|
|
|
|
), was not affected in whole expanding leaves, fruit, and seedlings of AS-IAA9 lines (see Supplemental Figure 2 online).
|
). Fusions of flowers, fruit, cotyledons, and stems were also observed (see Supplemental Figure 3 online). In addition, bifurcated, triple, or quadruple cotyledons were also frequently observed in AS-IAA9 seedlings (Figure 5E). While wild-type tomato flowers and fruit normally carry five to six symmetrically arranged sepals, AS-IAA9 tomato invariably had partially fused and asymmetrically arranged sepals (Figure 5F). The tomato entire mutant also carries, though at a lower frequency, asymmetrical sepals and a multifusion phenotype affecting leaves, flowers, and fruits.
Fruit Set Prior to Pollination Results in Parthenocarpy in AS-IAA9 Plants
Downregulation of IAA9 resulted in a dramatic alteration of early fruit development, with all AS-IAA9 lines exhibiting precocious fruit set prior to anthesis, resulting in parallel fruit and flower development (Figure 6B). Depending on how early the precocious enlargement of the fruit occurred, the development of the stamens was either completely impaired (Figure 6A), or in less severe cases, the fused stamen cones were torn open by the developing fruit (Figure 6B). The accelerated enlargement of the fruit positioned the stigma out of reach of the stamens, impairing self-pollination and contributing to the development of seedless fruit (Figure 6C). Despite their parthenocarpic character, these fruit were similar in appearance to wild-type tomato in terms of size, skin color, and flesh consistency (Figure 6C) as well as ripening-associated ethylene production (see Supplemental Figure 4 online). In the strongly inhibited line AS111, the proportion of parthenocarpic fruit reached 82% (Figure 6D). Once again, the level of downregulation of the IAA9 gene strongly correlated with the severity of the phenotypes. The most strongly downregulated lines exhibited the highest percentage of parthenocarpic fruit (Figure 6D).
|
|
|
|
-naphthalene acetic acid (NAA), promoted root regeneration at concentrations above 0.1 µM, while in AS-IAA9, the critical concentration was 10-fold lower (0.01 µM). At concentrations higher than optimal, auxin still promoted root formation but inhibited root outgrowth, resulting in short and swollen roots. At 40 µM, root regeneration was almost completely suppressed in AS-IAA9, while it was still active in the wild type, indicating that AS-IAA9 lines were more sensitive to the inhibitory effect of high auxin concentrations. The higher sensitivity of AS-IAA9 plants to auxin was further explored by determining the auxin dose response on hypocotyl segments. Figure 8B shows that after 23 h of auxin treatment the maximum hypocotyl elongation was obtained with 10–4 M for the wild type, while it was reached with a 10-fold lower concentration (10–5 M) in the AS-IAA9 lines.
|
|
|
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONRESULTSDISCUSSIONMETHODSREFERENCES |
|---|
A number of Aux/IAA proteins have been shown to function as transcriptional repressors through interactions with ARF proteins that bind to auxin-responsive elements in the promoters of auxin-responsive genes. In Arabidopsis, mutations in domain II of Aux/IAA proteins result in the relative stabilization of the mutated proteins, leading in most cases to phenotypes consistent with a reduced auxin responsiveness (Reed, 2001). Gain-of-function mutations in individual Arabidopsis Aux/IAA genes result in distinctive phenotypes, presumably indicative of the specific expression patterns and/or alterations in the dynamics of homoprotein/heteroprotein interactions between Aux/IAA and ARFs. Intragenic suppressors of gain-of-function alleles (Timpte et al., 1994; Rouse et al., 1998; Tian and Reed, 1999) and T-DNA insertional mutants (Nagpal et al., 2000) have subtle or indiscernible phenotypes (Reed, 2001; Liscum and Reed, 2002). It is generally thought that functional redundancy in the Aux/IAA gene family in Arabidopsis accounts for the absence of clear phenotypes, and as an attempt to overcome this problem, efforts are now underway to isolate lines with mutations in several Aux/IAAs. In this work, the IAA9 antisense construct was mainly targeted to the 3' untranslated region to prevent cross-inhibition of other Aux/IAA genes through a sequence homology-based posttranscriptional mechanism. The efficiency of this strategy was validated by assessing the expression of nine Aux/IAA genes, including IAA6, which shares the highest sequence similarity with IAA9, and none of them were downregulated in the AS-IAA9 transgenic plants (Figure 10A; see Supplemental Figure 5 online). These data support the hypothesis that the observed phenotypes were directly attributable to the downregulation of the IAA9 gene. Although the phylogenetic data clearly indicate that IAA9 protein bears specific domains that are not found in other Aux/IAA subfamilies, it remains possible, however, that the expression of a yet unidentified tomato Aux/IAA might be directly affected by the transgene. We have generated a number of transgenic lines downregulated in other Aux/IAA genes, and none of them have reproduced the dramatic leaf and fruit phenotypes displayed by the AS-IAA9 lines. In this context, the AS-IAA9 tomato lines present a valuable means to determine Aux/IAA dynamics in auxin response and to reveal distinct roles for Aux/IAA genes that have not been described previously, including their role in fruit set and leaf morphogenesis.
IAA9 was isolated from a tomato fruit cDNA library and found to code for a putative member of the Aux/IAA protein family (Jones et al., 2002). The strong sequence similarity of the highly conserved Aux/IAA domains I to IV, the nuclear localization of the encoded protein, and the phenotypes of the AS-IAA9 tomato lines strongly suggest that IAA9 encodes a functional Aux/IAA protein. Aux/IAA multigene families have been isolated from Arabidopsis (Abel et al., 1995), tobacco (Dargeviciute et al., 1998), tomato (Nebenfuhr et al., 2000), soybean (Glycine max; Ainley et al., 1988), and a number of other dicot and monocot species. Tomato IAA9 and its putative Arabidopsis orthologs, IAA9 and IAA8, belong to Aux/IAA subfamily IV (Figure 2), which includes members encoding proteins 50 to 89% larger than Aux/IAAs from all other subfamilies. In addition to the domains I to IV common to all Aux/IAAs, subfamily IV proteins have a highly conserved, extended N-terminal region upstream of domain I and between domains I and II, comprising up to 150 extra amino acids. This includes a (Pxx)2 motif located between domains I and II and several other amino acid domains perfectly conserved across plant species (shaded in gray in Figure 1) that are indicative of a conserved function for these regions.
Auxin responsiveness of Aux/IAA genes differs considerably from gene to gene. Depending on the gene and concentration of the exogenous hormone, responses range from strong and rapid induction (Abel et al., 1995) to a slight decrease in transcript abundance (Rogg et al., 2001). IAA9 exhibits several features in common with its Arabidopsis orthologs IAA9 and IAA8, including widespread high-level basal expression compared with other Aux/IAA genes and a relatively weak auxin inducibility. No phenotypes have been reported to date for knockout or gain-of-function mutations in any member of subfamily IV in Arabidopsis (IAA9 and IAA8) or in any other plant species.
Fruit set is triggered by pollination and fertilization, and auxin signaling is thought to play a dynamic role in the regulation of fruit set and early growth. It has been postulated that auxin is first produced by elongating pollen tubes and then by the embryo and endosperm in the developing seeds. Subsequent development of the fruit appears to depend on these sources of auxin. Supporting this hypothesis, the auxin-resistant tomato mutant, diageotropica, has reduced fruit set, fruit weight, and seed production (Balbi and Lomax, 2003) and the application of either auxin or auxin transport inhibitors that cause an increase in auxin in the ovary stimulate fruit set and the development of parthenocarpic fruit (Gustafson, 1937; Beyer and Quebedeaux, 1974). Parthenocarpy has also been induced in tomato, eggplant (Solanum melongena), and tobacco by ovary-targeted ectopic expression of Agrobacterium iaaM and rolB genes, which confer higher auxin production and increased auxin sensitivity, respectively (Ficcadenti et al., 1999; Carmi et al., 2003). Because AS-IAA9 plants show precocious fruit set and marked parthenocarpy, it appears that in wild-type plants the presence of the IAA9 protein prevents ovary development prior to pollination, potentially by acting as a negative regulator of auxin response pathways. Based on our data supporting a transcriptional repressor activity for IAA9, its downregulation in the antisense lines may release the expression of target auxin-responsive genes, thus mimicking a burst of auxin produced during pollination leading to fruit set and development independent of pollination and fertilization. In the pat-2 and pat-3/pat-4 tomato mutants, it has been postulated that elevated levels of gibberellins (GAs) account for parthenocarpic fruit set and growth (Fos et al., 2000, 2001). In these mutants, fruit set can be inhibited by paclobutrazol, an inhibitor of GA synthesis, and this inhibition can be reversed by exogenous GA application. Because auxin has been shown to promote GA biosynthesis (Ross et al., 2000) and to modulate GA responses (Fu and Harberd, 2003), it is possible that the precocious fruit set and development in AS-IAA9 lines is mediated by modified GA responses through auxin/GA crosstalk. Treatment of AS-IAA9 flowers with paclobutrazol or crosses between AS-IAA9 lines and GA-deficient mutants (gib-1, gib-2, and gib-3) may reveal whether auxin induces parthenocarpy via GA signaling or whether the two hormones induce fruit set and development by separate, parallel pathways.
Once fruit set has occurred, two peaks of auxin production are seen during normal tomato fruit development (Gillaspy et al., 1993), the first at 10 d after anthesis and the second coinciding with the final phase of seed development. Parthenocarpic fruit are generally smaller than seeded fruit, suggesting that seed-derived auxin is required for full pericarp cell expansion (Mapelli et al., 1978). AS-IAA9 parthenocarpic fruit are of a similar size to seeded wild-type fruit (Figures 5F and 6C) and have the same flesh consistency and fresh weight, suggesting that downregulation of IAA9 can also compensate for the lack of seed-influenced pericarp cell expansion.
One of the most striking phenotypes exhibited by the AS-IAA9 plants is the simple leaf architecture, which stands in a marked contrast to the wild-type compound leaf. In some cases, changes in leaf shape are coupled with changes in vascular patterning, suggesting a link between the controls on cell growth, division, and differentiation (Dengler and Kang, 2001). Although, the molecular mechanisms controlling vascular differentiation and leaf morphogenesis during plant organ ontogeny are yet to be fully elucidated, a number of observations have implicated auxin in the formation of vascular tissues in plant organs. These include vascular strand formation in response to local auxin application (Sachs, 2000) and the effects of impaired auxin transport on vascular patterning (Mattsson et al., 1999; Koizumi et al., 2005). In Arabidopsis leaf primordia, auxin response patterns presage sites of procambial differentiation, and auxin is instrumental in patterning Arabidopsis leaf vasculature (Mattsson et al., 2003). The Arabidopsis gain-of-function aux/iaa mutant bdl and auxin-resistant mutant axr6 exhibit severely disrupted vascular networks (Hamann et al., 1999; Hobbie et al., 2000), and in the loss-of-function arf mutant, monopteros, marginal leaf veins are missing or interrupted (Przemeck et al., 1996). The increased vascular network in AS-IAA9 leaves indicates that downregulation of IAA9 resulted in more cells undergoing vascular differentiation and that IAA9 is a key mediator in the auxin-dependent regulation of vascular vein patterning and leaf morphogenesis. Interestingly, treatment of wild-type tomato plants with NPA resulted in a simple leaf shape and enhanced vascular differentiation that mimic the AS-IAA9 phenotype in an exaggerated manner. It appears, therefore, that in tomato and Arabidopsis, disruption of correct pattern of either auxin distribution or response can affect the correct establishment of leaf architecture. Our data bring direct evidence for the role of an Aux/IAA gene in leaf morphogenesis and indicate that enhanced auxin responsiveness leads to altered vascular network patterning and leaf ontogeny. To investigate the possible involvement of IAA9 in other tomato leaf morphology mutants, we examined transcript accumulation of the gene in entire and Lanceolate, two natural monogenic mutants with a simple-leaf phenotype, and in the Petroselinum mutant that has supercompound leaves. IAA9 transcript accumulation was found to be strongly reduced in the entire mutant (Figure 5C) but not in the Lanceolate and Petroselinum mutants (see Supplemental Figure 1 online). However, in the case of Lanceolate, the expression data should be regarded cautiously, as only semidominant mutants are available and the presence of one copy of the wild-type allele may be sufficient to drive a normal expression of the IAA9 gene. Our data suggest either that LANCEOLATE and PETROSELINUM act downstream of IAA9 or that other signaling pathways not involving IAA9 operate in the making of compound leaves. Ectopic expression of the maize homeobox gene KNOTTED-1 in tomato resulted in a supercompound leaf architecture, with each leaf having up to 2000 leaflets (Hareven et al., 1996). However, in AS-IAA9 lines, transcript accumulation of two tomato orthologs of KNOTTED-1 was not affected in the leaves or in other organs (see Supplemental Figure 2 online). These data suggest the coexistence of multiple components controlling leaf ontogeny and vascular vein system patterning. Moreover, these pathways seem not to compensate for one another, as the presence of all these components seem to be required for proper leaf morphogenesis.
The phenotypes of AS-IAA9 lines confirm the existence of both overlapping and distinct roles for Aux/IAA genes in plant developmental processes. The phenotypes associated with gain-of-function mutations in Aux/IAA genes have been attributed in most cases to a reduced auxin responsiveness, and in the Arabidopsis axr2-1 and shy2-2 mutants, this was clearly correlated with a lower expression level of some auxin-induced genes (Reed, 2001). Most of the gain-of-function mutants, such as iaa3/shy2-2, iaa6/shy1-1, iaa7/axr2-1, and iaa17/axr3-1, have short hypocotyls, and AS-IAA9 seedlings have longer hypocotyls than the wild type, suggesting that these Aux/IAA proteins may act as inhibitors of hypocotyl elongation. Arabidopsis gain-of-function aux/iaa mutants display distinct and specific phenotypes. For example, iaa12/bdl-1 lacks an embryonic root (Hamann et al., 1999), iaa14/slr has no lateral roots (Fukaki et al., 2002), and iaa19/mgs2 mutants have aphototropic hypocotyls (Tatematsu et al., 2004). This not only reveals different roles for the Aux/IAA members, but also emphasizes the high level of complexity permitted by the large number of Aux/IAA genes. However, it is yet unclear whether these differences result from cell-specific expression or functional differences among the corresponding Aux/IAA proteins. Using an antisense strategy to downregulate other members of the Aux/IAA gene family (IAA1, IAA3, and IAA8) in tomato revealed that transgenic lines altered in different gene members share some common phenotypes that related to altered auxin responses, but they also displayed specific, reproducible phenotypes (H. Wang and M. Bouzayen, unpublished data). It is particularly noteworthy that none of these downregulated lines displayed precocious fruit set and parthenocarpy, clearly indicating distinct roles for tomato Aux/IAAs during plant growth and development.
Most of the phenotypes exhibited by AS-IAA9 plants were consistent with the IAA9 protein being a negative regulator of auxin responses. Expression of the auxin-responsive IAA3 promoter-driven GUS reporter gene in the AS-IAA9 genetic background clearly indicates that IAA9 can act as a negative regulator of auxin-responsive gene expression. Moreover, the promoter becomes active in tissues and organs where it is normally silent, mimicking the expression pattern obtained upon exogenous auxin treatment.
It is striking that all Aux/IAA knockout mutants examined so far have no or subtle phenotypes, while partially silenced AS-IAA9 lines exhibited clear phenotypes. It is possible that the complete knockout of these genes triggers a compensation mechanism through functionally redundant genes and that this mechanism is not activated when a residual expression of the gene is still present, like in the AS-IAA9 lines. Strikingly, while a number of aux/iaa gain-of-function mutants have been described, our attempts to generate IAA9-overexpressing lines under the control of the 35S constitutive promoter were unsuccessful. It is possible that the presence of high levels of IAA9 protein without discrimination between tissue types is incompatible with organ differentiation that is vital to normal plant development. Indeed, in the case of Arabidopsis aux/iaa gain-of-function mutants, although the proteins are more stable, the expression of the gene is still under the tight control of the endogenous promoter that continues to finely tune the expression of the mutated gene in a tissue-specific manner. These observations sustain the idea that the expression of Aux/IAA genes is under a complex and highly coordinated control mechanism.
|
METHODS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONRESULTSDISCUSSIONMETHODSREFERENCES |
|---|
Plant Transformation
To generate AS-IAA9 transgenic plants, forward 5'-TGGCCACCCATTCGATCTTTTAG-3' and reverse 5'-AGACAAACTCCAATATCAAACGG-3' primers encompassing the 3' untranslated region and part of the 3' terminal coding region of the IAA9 cDNA were used to amplify a partial IAA9 clone. This fragment was then cloned into pGA643 binary vector in antisense orientation under the transcriptional control of the cauliflower mosaic virus 35S promoter and the Nos terminator. Transgenic plants were generated by Agrobacterium tumefaciens–mediated transformation according to Jones et al. (2002), and transformed lines were first selected on kanamycin (70 mg L–1) and then analyzed by both PCR and DNA gel blot analysis to check the presence and the number of T-DNA insertions and to discriminate between different transformation events in the various transgenic lines obtained.
Phenotypical and Physiological Characterizations of AS-IAA9
Phenotypical characterization was performed on homozygote lines. For auxin dose–response experiments, cotyledon explants from wild-type and AS-IAA9 9-d-old seedlings were incubated on MS medium containing the indicated auxin (NAA) concentrations in growth chamber conditions described as above for 10 d. For auxin dose–response experiments performed with hypocotyl segments, hypocotyl fragments, 8 mm long, were isolated just below the cotyledons nodes from 5-d-old light-grown seedlings and then immediately floated in sucrose/MES buffer (1% sucrose [w/v] and 5 mM MES/KOH, pH 6.0) in 8-cm Petri dishes. After 1 to 2 h pre-incubation, the hypocotyl segments were randomly distributed to fresh buffer solutions with or without NAA and measured following 23 h of incubation with gentle agitation at room temperature. For NPA treatment, the seeds were sown on MS medium containing 1 µM NPA, and the phenotypes affecting root and leaf growth were observed on young 19-d-old seedlings. For auxin treatment, 21-d-old tomato seedlings were harvested and incubated in 50% MS buffer containing 20 µM IAA or not (mock treatment) for the time indicated (30 min, 3 h). Thereafter, tissues were immediately frozen in liquid nitrogen and stored at –80°C until RNA extraction. For light microscopy used for determination of venation patterning, plant materials were prepared as follows. The third leaves were taken from 28-d-old light-grown seedlings and fixed overnight in a solution (acetic acid 14%, ethanol 84%). The samples were then dehydrated through a graded ethanol series and cleared in a solution of chloral hydrate (200 g chloral hydrate; 20 g glycerol; 50 g distilled water). Stereomicroscopic photographs were taken under light-field conditions. Mature xylem cells appear dark under light-field optics due to the refraction properties of their thicker secondary cell walls.
Flower Emasculation and Cross Assay
Flower buds of wild-type or transgenic plants were emasculated before dehiscence of anthers (closed flowers) to avoid accidental self-pollination. Cross-pollination was performed on emasculated flowers one day prior to anthesis. For emasculation and cross-fertilization experiments, 8 to 10 flowers were kept per plant to ensure equivalent growth conditions for all fruit.
Gene Expression Analysis
Total RNA was extracted according to Jones et al. (2002). The RT-PCR analysis was performed as described previously (Zegzouti et al., 1999), and in each PCR reaction, the internal reference ubi3 was coamplified with the target gene. Forward (F) and reverse (R) primers used for RT-PCR amplification of the target genes in each RNA sample are the following: for IAA9 (F 5'-TGGCCACCCATTCGATCTTTTAG-3' and R 5'-CGCAACACACATTAGTTTGCAG-3'), for IAA3 (F 5'-AACAAGACTCAGCTCCTGCACC-3' and R 5'-CATCACCAACAAGCATCCAATC-3'), for IAA8 (F 5'-ATGACTGAGCTAACTCTCGGCTTA-3' and R 5'-ACTCGACGATCCCCCAGGTGTTCT-3'), for IAA2 (F 5'-AAGCGAGCTATGTTAAAGTGAGCA-3' and R 5'-CCGTTGTATCCATCTGTTTCTGAA-3'), for IAA6 (F 5'-AGGAGACTGAGCTGAGACTTGGGTT-3' and R 5'-CAACTTGAACCTGTTCTCCCTTCAT-3'), for GH3 (F 5'-AGCTCGTCATCACAACATACGC-3' and R 5'-CAACTCGCCCTTGTCGATAAAC-3'), for SAUR (F 5'-GGCTATCCGTATGCCTCGTA and R 5'-CCACCCATCGGATGATTAAA-3'), for DR12 (F 5'-CATGCTGATTTCGTTGTACCTTAC-3' and R 5'-GTCTAAAAGAGCACTCCCTC-3'), and for ubi3 (F 5'-AGAAGAAGACCTACACCAAGCC-3' and R 5'-TCCCAAGGGTTGTCACATACATC-3').
Protoplast Isolation and Transient Expression of IAA9-GFP Fusion Gene
The coding sequence of IAA9 was cloned as a C-terminal fusion in frame with the GFP into the pGreen vector (Hellens et al., 2000) and expressed under the control of the 35S promoter. Protoplasts used for transfection were obtained from suspension-cultured tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum) BY-2 cells according to the method described previously (Leclercq et al., 2005). Protoplasts were transfected by a modified polyethylene glycol method as described by Abel and Theologis (1994). Typically, 0.2 mL of protoplast suspension (0.5 x 106) was transfected with 50 µg of shared salmon sperm carrier DNA and 30 µg of either 35S:IAA9-GFP or 35S:GFP (control) plasmid DNA. Transfected protoplasts were incubated 16 h at 25°C and analyzed for GFP fluorescence by confocal microscopy as by Leclercq et al. (2005). All transient expression assays were repeated at least three times.
Histochemical GUS Analysis
Transgenic lines bearing the IAA3 promoter/GUS fusion construct (ProIAA3-GUS) were incubated at 37°C overnight with GUS staining solution (100 mM sodium phosphate buffer, pH 7.2, 10 mM EDTA, 0.1% Triton, and 1 mM 5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl-ß-D-glucuronic acid) to reveal GUS activity. Following GUS staining, samples were washed several times to extract chlorophyll using a graded ethanol series.
Sequence Analysis
Amino acid sequence alignments were performed using ClustalW (http://bioweb.pasteur.fr/seqanal/interfaces/clustalw-simple.html) assisted by manual adjustment. Phylogenetic analyses were performed with PAUP (Phylogenetic Analysis Using Parsimony, version 4.0 b10). All heuristic searches for optimal trees were performed by TBR (tree bisection reconnection) branch swapping with option MULPARS in effect. Starting trees were obtained by random addition (10 replicates). For each of the 5000 bootstrap replicates, 10 heuristic searches were performed with random addition of protein samples. The phylogenetic tree was displayed with TreeView (http://taxonomy.zoology.gla.ac.uk/rod/treeview.html).
Accession Numbers
Sequence data from this article can be found in the GenBank/EMBL data libraries under accession number AJ937282. GenBank accession numbers for the sequences analyzed in the phylogenetic analysis are as follows: AtIAA1 (P49677), AtIAA2 (P49678), AtIAA3 (Q38822), AtIAA4 (P33077), AtIAA5 (P33078), AtIAA6 (Q38824), AtIAA7 (Q38825), AtIAA8 (Q38826), AtIAA9 (Q38827), AtIAA10 (Q38828), AtIAA11 (Q38829), AtIAA12 (Q38830), AtIAA13 (Q38831), AtIAA14 (Q38832), AtIAA16 (O24407), AtIAA17 (P93830), AtIAA18 (O24408), AtIAA19 (O24409), AtIAA20 (O24410), AtIAA26 (Q8LAL2), AtIAA27 (Q9ZSY8), AtIAA28 (Q9XFM0), AtIAA29 (Q93WC4), AtIAA30 (Q9M1R4), AtIAA31 (Q8H174), AtIAA32 (Q8RYC6), AtIAA33 (Q9FKM7), AtIAA34 (Q9C5X0), ZeARP (AAM12952), NtIAA9 (CAD10639), VvIAA (AAL92850), StIAA (AAM29182), CsIAA2 (BAA85821), OsIAAa (BAD81331.1), OsIAAb (BAD67992.1), OsIAAc (BAD22024.1), OsIAA1 (CAC80823.1), OsIAA2 (AAK98708.1), OsIAA8 (CAF28457.1), and OsIAA18 (BAA99424.1).
|
Acknowledgments |
|---|
|
Footnotes |
|---|
Online version contains Web-only data. 
Article, publication date, and citation information can be found at www.plantcell.org/cgi/doi/10.1105/tpc.105.033415.
Received April 12, 2005; Revision received June 13, 2005. accepted August 3, 2005.
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONRESULTSDISCUSSIONMETHODSREFERENCES |
|---|
Abel, S., and Theologis, A. (1994). Transient transformation of Arabidopsis leaf protoplasts: A versatile experimental system to study gene expression. Plant J. 5, 421–427.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Ainley, W.M., Walker, J.C., Nagao, R.T., and Key, J.L. (1988). Sequence and characterization of two auxin-regulated genes from soybean. J. Biol. Chem. 263, 10658–10666.
Balbi, V., and Lomax, T.L. (2003). Regulation of early tomato fruit development by the diageotropica gene. Plant Physiol. 131, 186–197.
Beyer, E.M., and Quebedeaux, B. (1974). Parthenocarpy in cucumber: Mechanism of action of auxin transport inhibitors. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 99, 385–390.
Carmi, N., Salts, Y., Dedicova, B., Shabtai, S., and Barg, R. (2003). Induction of parthenocarpy in tomato via specific expression of the rolB gene in the ovary. Planta 217, 726–735.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Dargeviciute, A., Roux, C., Decreux, A., Sitbon, F., and Perrot-Rechenmann, C. (1998). Molecular cloning and expression of the early auxin-responsive Aux/IAA gene family in Nicotiana tabacum. Plant Cell Physiol. 39, 993–1002.
Dengler, N., and Kang, J. (2001). Vascular patterning and leaf shape. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 4, 50–56.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Dharmasiri, N., Dharmasiri, S., and Estelle, M. (2005). The F-box protein TIR1 is an auxin receptor. Nature 435, 441–445.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ficcadenti, N., Sestili, S., Pandolfini, T., Cirillo, C., Rotino, G., and Spena, A. (1999). Genetic engineering of parthenocarpic fruit development in tomato. Mol. Breed. 5, 463–470.
Fos, M., Nuez, F., and Garcia-Martinez, J.L. (2000). The gene pat-2, which induces natural parthenocarpy, alters the gibberellin content in unpollinated tomato ovaries. Plant Physiol. 122, 471–480.
Fos, M., Proano, K., Nuez, F., and Garcia-Martinez, J.L. (2001). Role of gibberellins in parthenocarpic fruit development induced by the genetic system pat-3/pat-4 in tomato. Physiol. Plant 111, 545–550.[CrossRef][Medline]
Friml, J. (2003). Auxin transport—Shaping the plant. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 6, 7–12.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Fu, X., and Harberd, N.P. (2003). Auxin promotes Arabidopsis root growth by modulating gibberellin response. Nature 421, 740–743.[CrossRef][Medline]
Fukaki, H., Tameda, S., Masuda, H., and Tasaka, M. (2002). Lateral root formation is blocked by a gain-of-function mutation in the SOLITARY-ROOT/IAA14 gene of Arabidopsis. Plant J. 29, 153–168.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Galweiler, L., Guan, C., Muller, A., Wisman, E., Mendgen, K., Yephremov, A., and Palme, K. (1998). Regulation of polar auxin transport by AtPIN1 in Arabidopsis vascular tissue. Science 282, 2226–2230.
Gillaspy, G., Ben-David, H., and Gruissem, W. (1993). Fruit: A developmental perspective. Plant Cell 5, 1439–1451.
Gustafson, F.G. (1937). Parthenocarpy induced by pollen extracts. Am. J. Bot. 24, 102–107.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
Hamann, T., Benkova, E., Baurle, I., Kientz, M., and Jurgens, G. (2002). The Arabidopsis BODENLOS gene encodes an auxin response protein inhibiting MONOPTEROS-mediated embryo patterning. Genes Dev. 16, 1610–1615.
Hamann, T., Mayer, U., and Jurgens, G. (1999). The auxin-insensitive bodenlos mutation affects primary root formation and apical-basal patterning in the Arabidopsis embryo. Development 126, 1387–1395.[Abstract]
Hareven, D., Gutfinger, T., Parnis, A., Eshed, Y., and Lifschitz, E. (1996). The making of a compound leaf: Genetic manipulation of leaf architecture in tomato. Cell 84, 735–744.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Hellens, R.P., Edwards, A.E., Leyland, N.R., Bean, S., and Mullineaux, P. (2000). pGreen: A versatile and flexible binary Ti vector for Agrobacterium-mediated plant transformation. Plant Mol. Biol. 42, 819–832.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Hobbie, L., McGovern, M., Hurwitz, L.R., Pierro, A., Liu, N.Y., Bandyopadhyay, A., and Estelle, M. (2000). The axr6 mutants of Arabidopsis thaliana define a gene involved in auxin response and early development. Development 127, 23–32.[Abstract]
Jones, B., Frasse, P., Olmos, E., Zegzouti, H., Li, Z.G., Latche, A., Pech, J.C., and Bouzayen, M. (2002). Down-regulation of DR12, an auxin-response-factor homolog, in the tomato results in a pleiotropic phenotype including dark green and blotchy ripening fruit. Plant J. 32, 603–613.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Kepinski, S., and Leyser, O. (2005). The Arabidopsis F-box protein TIR1 is an auxin receptor. Nature 435, 446–451.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kessler, S., and Sinha, N. (2004). Shaping up: The genetic control of leaf shape. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 7, 65–72.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Kim, B.C., Soh, M.S., Kang, B.G., Furuya, M., and Nam, H.G. (1996). Two dominant photomorphogenic mutations of Arabidopsis thaliana identified as suppressor mutations of hy2. Plant J. 15, 441–456.
Kim, J., Harter, K., and Theologis, A. (1997). Protein-protein interactions among the Aux/IAA proteins. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94, 11786–11791.
Koizumi, K., Naramoto, S., Sawa, S., Yahara, N., Ueda, T., Nakano, A., Sugiyama, M., and Fukuda, H. (2005). VAN3 ARF-GAP-mediated vesicle transport is involved in leaf vascular network formation. Development 132, 1699–1711.
Leclercq, J., Ranty, B., Sanchez-Ballesta, M.T., Li, Z., Jones, B., Jauneau, A., Pech, J.C., Latche, A., Ranjeva, R., and Bouzayen, M. (2005). Molecular and biochemical characterization of LeCRK1, a ripening-associated tomato CDPK-related kinase. J. Exp. Bot. 56, 25–35.
Liscum, E., and Reed, J.W. (2002). Genetics of Aux/IAA and ARF action in plant growth and development. Plant Mol. Biol. 49, 387–400.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Mapelli, S.C., Frova, G., Torti, G., and Soressi, G. (1978). Relationship between set, development and activities of growth regulators in tomato fruits. Plant Cell Physiol. 19, 1281–1288.
Mattsson, J., Ckurshumova, W., and Berleth, T. (2003). Auxin signaling in Arabidopsis leaf vascular development. Plant Physiol. 131, 1327–1339.
Mattsson, J., Sung, Z.R., and Berleth, T. (1999). Responses of plant vascular systems to auxin transport inhibition. Development 126, 2979–2991.[Abstract]
Nagpal, P., Walker, L.M., Young, J.C., Sonawala, A., Timpte, C., Estelle, M., and Reed, J.W. (2000). AXR2 encodes a member of the Aux/IAA protein family. Plant Physiol. 123, 563–574.
Nebenfuhr, A., White, T.J., and Lomax, T.L. (2000). The diageotropica mutation alters auxin induction of a subset of the Aux/IAA gene family in tomato. Plant Mol. Biol. 44, 73–84.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Ouellet, F., Overvoorde, P.J., and Theologis, A. (2001). IAA17/AXR3: Biochemical insight into an auxin mutant phenotype. Plant Cell 13, 829–841.
Park, J.Y., Kim, H.J., and Kim, J. (2002). Mutation in domain II of IAA1 confers diverse auxin-related phenotypes and represses auxin-activated expression of Aux/IAA genes in steroid regulator-inducible system. Plant J. 32, 669–683.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Przemeck, G.K., Mattsson, J., Hardtke, C.S., Sung, Z.R., and Berleth, T. (1996). Studies on the role of the Arabidopsis gene MONOPTEROS in vascular development and plant cell axialization. Planta 200, 229–237.[Web of Science][Medline]
Reed, J.W. (2001). Roles and activities of Aux/IAA proteins in Arabidopsis. Trends Plant Sci. 6, 420–425.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Rogg, L.E., Lasswell, J., and Bartel, B. (2001). A gain-of-function mutation in IAA28 suppresses lateral root development. Plant Cell 13, 465–480.
Ross, J.J., O'Neill, D.P., Smith, J.J., Kerckhoffs, L.H., and Elliott, R.C. (2000). Evidence that auxin promotes gibberellin A1 biosynthesis in pea. Plant J. 21, 547–552.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Rouse, D., Mackay, P., Stirnberg, P., Estelle, M., and Leyser, O. (1998). Changes in auxin response from mutations in an AUX/IAA gene. Science 279, 1371–1373.
Sachs, T. (2000). Integrating cellular and organismic aspects of vascular differentiation. Plant Cell Physiol. 41, 649–656.
Servant, F., Bru, C., Carrere, S., Courcelle, E., Gouzy, J., Peyruc, D., and Kahn, D. (2002). ProDom: Automated clustering of homologous domains. Brief. Bioinform. 3, 246–251.
Tatematsu, K., Kumagai, S., Muto, H., Sato, A., Watahiki, M.K., Harper, R.M., Liscum, E., and Yamamoto, K.T. (2004). MASSUGU2 encodes Aux/IAA19, an auxin-regulated protein that functions together with the transcriptional activator NPH4/ARF7 to regulate differential growth responses of hypocotyl and formation of lateral roots in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Cell 16, 379–393.
Tian, Q., and Reed, J.W. (1999). Control of auxin-regulated root development by the Arabidopsis thaliana SHY2/IAA3 gene. Development 126, 711–721.[Abstract]
Timpte, C., Wilson, A.K., and Estelle, M. (1994). The axr2-1 mutation of Arabidopsis thaliana is a gain-of-function mutation that disrupts an early step in auxin response. Genetics 138, 1239–1249.[Abstract]
Tiwari, S.B., Hagen, G., and Guilfoyle, T.J. (2004). Aux/IAA proteins contain a potent transcriptional repression domain. Plant Cell 16, 533–543.
Ulmasov, T., Hagen, G., and Guilfoyle, T.J. (1997). ARF1, a transcription factor that binds to auxin response elements. Science 276, 1865–1868.
Vogler, H., and Kuhlemeier, C. (2003). Simple hormones but complex signalling. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 6, 51–56.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Yang, X., Lee, S., So, J.H., Dharmasiri, S., Dharmasiri, N., Ge, L., Jensen, C., Hangarter, R., Hobbie, L., and Estelle, M. (2004). The IAA1 protein is encoded by AXR5 and is a substrate of SCFTIR1. Plant J. 40, 772–782.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
Zegzouti, H., Jones, B., Frasse, P., Marty, C., Maitre, B., Latch, A., Pech, J.C., and Bouzayen, M. (1999). Ethylene-regulated gene expression in tomato fruit: Characterization of novel ethylene-responsive and ripening-related genes isolated by differential display. Plant J. 18, 589–600.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  Y. Yang, Y. Wu, J. Pirrello, F. Regad, M. Bouzayen, W. Deng, and Z. Li Silencing Sl-EBF1 and Sl-EBF2 expression causes constitutive ethylene response phenotype, accelerated plant senescence, and fruit ripening in tomato J. Exp. Bot., March 1, 2010; 61(3): 697 - 708. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. Scarpella, M. Barkoulas, and M. Tsiantis Control of Leaf and Vein Development by Auxin Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol, January 1, 2010; 2(1): a001511 - a001511. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Sundberg and L. Ostergaard Distinct and Dynamic Auxin Activities During Reproductive Development Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol, December 1, 2009; 1(6): a001628 - a001628. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 T. J. Donner, I. Sherr, and E. Scarpella Regulation of preprocambial cell state acquisition by auxin signaling in Arabidopsis leaves Development, October 1, 2009; 136(19): 3235 - 3246. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. David-Schwartz, D. Koenig, and N. R. Sinha LYRATE Is a Key Regulator of Leaflet Initiation and Lamina Outgrowth in Tomato PLANT CELL, October 1, 2009; 21(10): 3093 - 3104. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Vrebalov, I. L. Pan, A. J. M. Arroyo, R. McQuinn, M. Chung, M. Poole, J. Rose, G. Seymour, S. Grandillo, J. Giovannoni, et al. Fleshy Fruit Expansion and Ripening Are Regulated by the Tomato SHATTERPROOF Gene TAGL1 PLANT CELL, October 1, 2009; 21(10): 3041 - 3062. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Koenig, E. Bayer, J. Kang, C. Kuhlemeier, and N. Sinha Auxin patterns Solanum lycopersicum leaf morphogenesis Development, September 1, 2009; 136(17): 2997 - 3006. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Martinelli, S. L. Uratsu, R. L. Reagan, Y. Chen, D. Tricoli, O. Fiehn, D. M. Rocke, C. S. Gasser, and A. M. Dandekar Gene regulation in parthenocarpic tomato fruit J. Exp. Bot., September 1, 2009; 60(13): 3873 - 3890. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. I. Zanor, S. Osorio, A. Nunes-Nesi, F. Carrari, M. Lohse, B. Usadel, C. Kuhn, W. Bleiss, P. Giavalisco, L. Willmitzer, et al. RNA Interference of LIN5 in Tomato Confirms Its Role in Controlling Brix Content, Uncovers the Influence of Sugars on the Levels of Fruit Hormones, and Demonstrates the Importance of Sucrose Cleavage for Normal Fruit Development and Fertility Plant Physiology, July 1, 2009; 150(3): 1204 - 1218. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Wang, N. Schauer, B. Usadel, P. Frasse, M. Zouine, M. Hernould, A. Latche, J.-C. Pech, A. R. Fernie, and M. Bouzayen Regulatory Features Underlying Pollination-Dependent and -Independent Tomato Fruit Set Revealed by Transcript and Primary Metabolite Profiling PLANT CELL, May 1, 2009; 21(5): 1428 - 1452. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. de Jong, C. Mariani, and W. H. Vriezen The role of auxin and gibberellin in tomato fruit set J. Exp. Bot., April 1, 2009; 60(5): 1523 - 1532. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Chaabouni, B. Jones, C. Delalande, H. Wang, Z. Li, I. Mila, P. Frasse, A. Latche, J.-C. Pech, and M. Bouzayen Sl-IAA3, a tomato Aux/IAA at the crossroads of auxin and ethylene signalling involved in differential growth J. Exp. Bot., March 1, 2009; 60(4): 1349 - 1362. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Y. Berger, S. Harpaz-Saad, A. Brand, H. Melnik, N. Sirding, J. P. Alvarez, M. Zinder, A. Samach, Y. Eshed, and N. Ori The NAC-domain transcription factor GOBLET specifies leaflet boundaries in compound tomato leaves Development, March 1, 2009; 136(5): 823 - 832. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Molesini, T. Pandolfini, G. L. Rotino, V. Dani, and A. Spena Aucsia Gene Silencing Causes Parthenocarpic Fruit Development in Tomato Plant Physiology, January 1, 2009; 149(1): 534 - 548. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
Z. Lin, L. Arciga-Reyes, S. Zhong, L. Alexander, R. Hackett, I. Wilson, and D. Grierson SlTPR1, a tomato tetratricopeptide repeat protein, interacts with the ethylene receptors NR and LeETR1, modulating ethylene and auxin responses and development J. Exp. Bot., November 1, 2008; 59(15): 4271 - 4287. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Goetz, L. C. Hooper, S. D. Johnson, J. C. M. Rodrigues, A. Vivian-Smith, and A. M. Koltunow Expression of Aberrant Forms of AUXIN RESPONSE FACTOR8 Stimulates Parthenocarpy in Arabidopsis and Tomato Plant Physiology, October 1, 2007; 145(2): 351 - 366. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. G.W.M. Schijlen, C.H. R. de Vos, S. Martens, H. H. Jonker, F. M. Rosin, J. W. Molthoff, Y. M. Tikunov, G. C. Angenent, A. J. van Tunen, and A. G. Bovy RNA Interference Silencing of Chalcone Synthase, the First Step in the Flavonoid Biosynthesis Pathway, Leads to Parthenocarpic Tomato Fruits Plant Physiology, July 1, 2007; 144(3): 1520 - 1530. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. Costantini, L. Landi, O. Silvestroni, T. Pandolfini, A. Spena, and B. Mezzetti Auxin Synthesis-Encoding Transgene Enhances Grape Fecundity Plant Physiology, April 1, 2007; 143(4): 1689 - 1694. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Hay, M. Barkoulas, and M. Tsiantis ASYMMETRIC LEAVES1 and auxin activities converge to repress BREVIPEDICELLUS expression and promote leaf development in Arabidopsis Development, October 15, 2006; 133(20): 3955 - 3961. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Goetz, A. Vivian-Smith, S. D. Johnson, and A. M. Koltunow AUXIN RESPONSE FACTOR8 Is a Negative Regulator of Fruit Initiation in Arabidopsis PLANT CELL, August 1, 2006; 18(8): 1873 - 1886. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 F. Bai and D. A. DeMason Hormone Interactions and Regulation of Unifoliata, PsPK2, PsPIN1 and LE Gene Expression in Pea (Pisum sativum) Shoot Tips Plant Cell Physiol., July 1, 2006; 47(7): 935 - 948. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ASPB Publications | THE PLANT CELL | PLANT PHYSIOLOGY | |
|---|---|---|---|
200 fruits.
