Sucrose control of phytochrome A signaling in Arabidopsis

被引:170
|
作者
Dijkwel, PP
Huijser, C
Weisbeek, PJ
Chua, NH
Smeekens, SCM
机构
[1] UNIV UTRECHT, DEPT MOL CELL BIOL, NL-3584 CH UTRECHT, NETHERLANDS
[2] ROCKEFELLER UNIV, PLANT MOL BIOL LAB, NEW YORK, NY 10021 USA
来源
PLANT CELL | 1997年 / 9卷 / 04期
关键词
D O I
10.1105/tpc.9.4.583
中图分类号
Q5 [生物化学]; Q7 [分子生物学];
学科分类号
071010 ; 081704 ;
摘要
The expression of the Arabidopsis plastocyanin (PC) gene is developmentally controlled and regulated by light. During seedling development, PC gene expression is transiently induced, and this induction can be repressed by sucrose. In transgenic seedlings carrying a PC promoter-luciferase fusion gene, the luciferase-induced in vivo luminescence was similarly repressed by sucrose. From a mutagenized population of such transgenic seedlings, we selected for mutant seedlings that displayed a high luminescence level when grown on a medium with 3% sucrose. This screening of mutants resulted in the isolation of several sucrose-uncoupled (sun) mutants showing reduced repression of luminescence by sucrose. Analysis of the sun mutants revealed that the accumulation of PC and chlorophyll a/b binding protein (CAB) mRNA was also sucrose uncoupled, although the extent of uncoupling varied. The effect of sucrose on far-red tight high-irradiance responses was studied in wild-type, sun1, sun6, and sun7 seedlings. In wild-type seedlings, sucrose repressed the far-red light-induced cotyledon opening and inhibition of hypocotyl elongation. sun7 seedlings showed reduced repression of these responses. Sucrose also repressed the far-red light-induced block of greening in wild-type seedlings, and both sun6 and sun7 were affected in this response. The results provide evidence for a close interaction between sucrose and light signaling pathways. Moreover, the sun6 and sun7 mutants genetically identify separate branches of phytochrome A-dependent signal transduction pathways.
引用
收藏
页码:583 / 595
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Arabidopsis FHY3 specifically gates phytochrome signaling to the circadian clock
    Allen, Trudie
    Koustenis, Athanasios
    Theodorou, George
    Somers, David E.
    Kay, Steve A.
    Whitelam, Garry C.
    Devlin, Paul F.
    PLANT CELL, 2006, 18 (10): : 2506 - 2516
  • [22] PIF4, a phytochrome-interacting bHLH factor, functions as a negative regulator of phytochrome B signaling in Arabidopsis
    Huq, E
    Quail, PH
    EMBO JOURNAL, 2002, 21 (10): : 2441 - 2450
  • [23] PHYTOCHROME INTERACTING FACTORS mediate metabolic control of the circadian system in Arabidopsis
    Shor, Ekaterina
    Paik, Inyup
    Kangisser, Shlomit
    Green, Rachel
    Huq, Enamul
    NEW PHYTOLOGIST, 2017, 215 (01) : 217 - 228
  • [24] The genetics of phytochrome signalling in Arabidopsis
    Hudson, ME
    SEMINARS IN CELL & DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY, 2000, 11 (06) : 475 - 483
  • [25] Phytochrome functions in Arabidopsis development
    Franklin, Keara A.
    Quail, Peter H.
    JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL BOTANY, 2010, 61 (01) : 11 - 24
  • [26] Phytochrome Regulation of Branching in Arabidopsis
    Finlayson, Scott A.
    Krishnareddy, Srirama R.
    Kebrom, Tesfamichael H.
    Casal, Jorge J.
    PLANT PHYSIOLOGY, 2010, 152 (04) : 1914 - 1927
  • [27] A Protein-Based Genetic Screening Uncovers Mutants Involved in Phytochrome Signaling in Arabidopsis
    Zhu, Ling
    Xin, Ruijiao
    Huq, Enamul
    FRONTIERS IN PLANT SCIENCE, 2016, 7
  • [28] Strigolactone-Regulated Hypocotyl Elongation Is Dependent on Cryptochrome and Phytochrome Signaling Pathways in Arabidopsis
    Jia, Kun-Peng
    Luo, Qian
    He, Sheng-Bo
    Lu, Xue-Dan
    Yang, Hong-Quan
    MOLECULAR PLANT, 2014, 7 (03) : 528 - 540
  • [29] The dof transcription factor OBP3 modulates phytochrome and cryptochroome signaling in Arabidopsis
    Ward, JM
    Cufr, CA
    Denzel, MA
    Neff, MM
    PLANT CELL, 2005, 17 (02): : 475 - 485
  • [30] Deletion of the RS domain of RRC1 impairs phytochrome B signaling in Arabidopsis
    Shikata, Hiromasa
    Nakashima, Moeko
    Matsuoka, Ken
    Matsushita, Tomonao
    PLANT SIGNALING & BEHAVIOR, 2012, 7 (08) : 933 - 936