Effect of phyB and phyC loss-of-function mutations on the wheat transcriptome under short and long day photoperiods.
FT1
FT2
FT3
Heading date
PPD1
Phytochrome
VRN1
Wheat
Journal
BMC plant biology
ISSN: 1471-2229
Titre abrégé: BMC Plant Biol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967807
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 Jun 2020
29 Jun 2020
Historique:
received:
08
04
2020
accepted:
18
06
2020
entrez:
1
7
2020
pubmed:
1
7
2020
medline:
23
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Photoperiod signals provide important cues by which plants regulate their growth and development in response to predictable seasonal changes. Phytochromes, a family of red and far-red light receptors, play critical roles in regulating flowering time in response to changing photoperiods. A previous study showed that loss-of-function mutations in either PHYB or PHYC result in large delays in heading time and in the differential regulation of a large number of genes in wheat plants grown in an inductive long day (LD) photoperiod. We found that under non-inductive short-day (SD) photoperiods, phyB-null and phyC-null mutants were taller, had a reduced number of tillers, longer and wider leaves, and headed later than wild-type (WT) plants. The delay in heading between WT and phy mutants was greater in LD than in SD, confirming the importance of PHYB and PHYC in accelerating heading date in LDs. Both mutants flowered earlier in SD than LD, the inverse response to that of WT plants. In both SD and LD photoperiods, PHYB regulated more genes than PHYC. We identified subsets of differentially expressed and alternatively spliced genes that were specifically regulated by PHYB and PHYC in either SD or LD photoperiods, and a smaller set of genes that were regulated in both photoperiods. We found that photoperiod had a contrasting effect on transcript levels of the flowering promoting genes VRN-A1 and PPD-B1 in phyB and phyC mutants compared to the WT. Our study confirms the major role of both PHYB and PHYC in flowering promotion in LD conditions. Transcriptome characterization revealed an unexpected reversion of the wheat LD plants into SD plants in the phyB-null and phyC-null mutants and identified flowering genes showing significant interactions between phytochromes and photoperiod that may be involved in this phenomenon. Our RNA-seq data provides insight into light signaling pathways in inductive and non-inductive photoperiods and a set of candidate genes to dissect the underlying developmental regulatory networks in wheat.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Photoperiod signals provide important cues by which plants regulate their growth and development in response to predictable seasonal changes. Phytochromes, a family of red and far-red light receptors, play critical roles in regulating flowering time in response to changing photoperiods. A previous study showed that loss-of-function mutations in either PHYB or PHYC result in large delays in heading time and in the differential regulation of a large number of genes in wheat plants grown in an inductive long day (LD) photoperiod.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We found that under non-inductive short-day (SD) photoperiods, phyB-null and phyC-null mutants were taller, had a reduced number of tillers, longer and wider leaves, and headed later than wild-type (WT) plants. The delay in heading between WT and phy mutants was greater in LD than in SD, confirming the importance of PHYB and PHYC in accelerating heading date in LDs. Both mutants flowered earlier in SD than LD, the inverse response to that of WT plants. In both SD and LD photoperiods, PHYB regulated more genes than PHYC. We identified subsets of differentially expressed and alternatively spliced genes that were specifically regulated by PHYB and PHYC in either SD or LD photoperiods, and a smaller set of genes that were regulated in both photoperiods. We found that photoperiod had a contrasting effect on transcript levels of the flowering promoting genes VRN-A1 and PPD-B1 in phyB and phyC mutants compared to the WT.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our study confirms the major role of both PHYB and PHYC in flowering promotion in LD conditions. Transcriptome characterization revealed an unexpected reversion of the wheat LD plants into SD plants in the phyB-null and phyC-null mutants and identified flowering genes showing significant interactions between phytochromes and photoperiod that may be involved in this phenomenon. Our RNA-seq data provides insight into light signaling pathways in inductive and non-inductive photoperiods and a set of candidate genes to dissect the underlying developmental regulatory networks in wheat.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32600268
doi: 10.1186/s12870-020-02506-0
pii: 10.1186/s12870-020-02506-0
pmc: PMC7325275
doi:
Substances chimiques
Phytochrome
11121-56-5
Phytochrome B
136250-22-1
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
297Subventions
Organisme : National Institute of Food and Agriculture
ID : 2017-67007-25939
Références
Development. 2019 Jul 23;146(14):
pubmed: 31337701
Plant Physiol. 2007 Dec;145(4):1484-94
pubmed: 17951465
Nature. 2003 Apr 17;422(6933):719-22
pubmed: 12700762
Plant Physiol. 2007 Nov;145(3):1043-51
pubmed: 17827270
Front Plant Sci. 2018 Jun 05;9:745
pubmed: 29922318
Plant J. 2008 Aug;55(4):543-54
pubmed: 18433437
Plant J. 1996 Nov;10(5):859-68
pubmed: 8953247
Plant Physiol. 2020 Jan;182(1):159-166
pubmed: 31690709
BMC Plant Biol. 2009 Aug 28;9:115
pubmed: 19712486
Nat Rev Genet. 2012 Sep;13(9):627-39
pubmed: 22898651
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Jul 12;108(28):11698-703
pubmed: 21709243
Plant Mol Biol. 2006 Mar;60(4):469-80
pubmed: 16525885
BMC Plant Biol. 2016 Jun 21;16(1):141
pubmed: 27329140
Theor Appl Genet. 2009 Jan;118(2):285-94
pubmed: 18839130
Plant Physiol. 2020 Jan;182(1):243-254
pubmed: 31501299
Nucleic Acids Res. 2019 Jun 4;47(10):5001-5015
pubmed: 30892623
Plant Physiol. 1997 Feb;113(2):611-9
pubmed: 9046599
Genetics. 2007 May;176(1):599-609
pubmed: 17339225
Plant Physiol. 2018 Feb;176(2):1025-1038
pubmed: 29138351
Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2006;57:837-58
pubmed: 16669784
Plant Physiol. 2018 Nov;178(3):1170-1186
pubmed: 30213796
J Exp Bot. 2016 Mar;67(5):1285-95
pubmed: 26712822
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Dec 30;111(52):18781-6
pubmed: 25512548
Plant J. 2012 Jul;71(1):71-84
pubmed: 22372488
Nat Biotechnol. 2015 Mar;33(3):290-5
pubmed: 25690850
Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2008;59:281-311
pubmed: 18257712
Trends Plant Sci. 2011 Jan;16(1):19-28
pubmed: 20833098
Plant Cell. 2005 Dec;17(12):3311-25
pubmed: 16278346
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Jul 15;111(28):10037-44
pubmed: 24961368
Plant Physiol. 2006 Mar;140(3):1109-17
pubmed: 16443694
Plant J. 2015 Oct;84(1):70-82
pubmed: 26252567
Curr Opin Plant Biol. 2009 Apr;12(2):178-84
pubmed: 19195924
Science. 2005 Nov 11;310(5750):1031-4
pubmed: 16284181
Elife. 2019 Jan 08;8:
pubmed: 30618375
Plant Physiol. 2016 Apr;170(4):2232-50
pubmed: 26893475
Breed Sci. 2019 Mar;69(1):127-132
pubmed: 31086490
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017 Feb 7;114(6):E913-E921
pubmed: 28096351
Plant Physiol. 2005 Aug;138(4):2364-73
pubmed: 16055679
Theor Appl Genet. 2013 Sep;126(9):2267-77
pubmed: 23737074
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017 Aug 8;114(32):E6695-E6702
pubmed: 28739888
Nat Genet. 2007 Nov;39(11):1410-3
pubmed: 17965713
Genetics. 2014 Sep;198(1):397-408
pubmed: 25023399
Plant Physiol Biochem. 2019 Sep;142:117-124
pubmed: 31279859
Front Plant Sci. 2016 Dec 26;7:1963
pubmed: 28083003
Bioinformatics. 2005 May 1;21(9):1859-75
pubmed: 15728110
Science. 2018 Aug 17;361(6403):
pubmed: 30115783
Bioinformatics. 2013 Jan 1;29(1):15-21
pubmed: 23104886
J Exp Bot. 2019 Jan 1;70(1):193-204
pubmed: 30295847
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Dec 19;103(51):19581-6
pubmed: 17158798
Mol Plant. 2013 Nov;6(6):1877-88
pubmed: 23713079
New Phytol. 2020 Jan;225(1):511-529
pubmed: 31418861
J Exp Bot. 2010;61(1):11-24
pubmed: 19815685
Sci Rep. 2017 Jul 14;7(1):5388
pubmed: 28710485
PLoS One. 2014 Aug 14;9(8):e105352
pubmed: 25122453
New Phytol. 2015 May;206(3):965-71
pubmed: 26042244
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Sep 27;108(39):16469-74
pubmed: 21930910
Plant Physiol. 2017 Jun;174(2):1139-1150
pubmed: 28408541
Nat Commun. 2019 Feb 18;10(1):812
pubmed: 30778068
Plant Physiol. 2017 Feb;173(2):1301-1315
pubmed: 28034954
Theor Appl Genet. 2007 Sep;115(5):721-33
pubmed: 17634915
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014 Dec 23;111(51):E5593-601
pubmed: 25480548
Plant J. 2012 Jun;70(5):727-38
pubmed: 22324426
Plant Physiol. 1992 Jun;99(2):765-70
pubmed: 16668953
PLoS One. 2014 Apr 09;9(4):e94171
pubmed: 24718312
Front Plant Sci. 2016 Jun 22;7:857
pubmed: 27458461
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Sep 11;109(37):15054-9
pubmed: 22927419
Plant Physiol. 2013 Oct;163(2):804-14
pubmed: 24014575
Science. 2018 Aug 17;361(6403):
pubmed: 30115782