|
Plant Physiol, June 2000, Vol. 123, pp. 563-574
AXR2 Encodes a Member of the Aux/IAA Protein
Family1
Punita
Nagpal,
Loni M.
Walker,2
Jeff C.
Young,
Ami
Sonawala,
Candace
Timpte,3
Mark
Estelle,4 and
Jason W.
Reed*
Department of Biology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill,
CB #3280, Coker Hall, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-3280 (P.N.,
A.S., J.W.R.); Department of Biology, Indiana University, Bloomington,
Indiana 47405 (L.M.W., C.T., M.E.); and Department of Biology, Western
Washington University, MS-9160, Bellingham, Washington 98225 (J.C.Y.)
 |
ABSTRACT |
The dominant gain-of-function axr2-1 mutation of
Arabidopsis causes agravitropic root and shoot growth, a short
hypocotyl and stem, and auxin-resistant root growth. We have cloned the AXR2 gene using a map-based approach, and find that it
is the same as IAA7, a member of the IAA
(indole-3-acetic acid) family of auxin-inducible genes. The
axr2-1 mutation changes a single amino acid in conserved
domain II of AXR2/IAA7. We isolated loss-of-function mutations in
AXR2/IAA7 as intragenic suppressors of
axr2-1 or in a screen for insertion mutations in
IAA genes. A null mutant has a slightly longer hypocotyl
than wild-type plants, indicating that AXR2/IAA7 controls development
in light-grown seedlings, perhaps in concert with other gene products.
Dark-grown axr2-1 mutant plants have short hypocotyls
and make leaves, suggesting that activation of AXR2/IAA7 is sufficient
to induce morphological responses normally elicited by light.
Previously described semidominant mutations in two other Arabidopsis
IAA genes cause some of the same phenotypes as axr2-1,
but also cause distinct phenotypes. These results illustrate functional
differences among members of the Arabidopsis IAA gene
family.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Auxin
(indole-3-acetic acid
[IAA]) mediates numerous aspects of plant growth and development
including stem elongation, lateral root initiation, gravitropism, and
apical dominance. Auxin is probably made in young leaves and possibly
in the root meristem (Thimann, 1977 ), and is transported throughout the
plant. This transport may result in gradients of auxin concentration
(Sachs, 1991 ; Uggla et al., 1998 ), which then help to pattern
embryonic, vascular, and meristem development (Goldsmith, 1977 ;
Thimann, 1977 ; Sachs, 1991 ; Liu et al., 1993 ; Przemeck et al., 1996 ;
Sabatini et al., 1999 ). Auxin has different effects on different
tissues. It can stimulate cell elongation in stems, promote cell
divisions leading to lateral root formation, or stimulate vascular
strand differentiation. The diverse effects of auxin in different cells may reflect differential mechanisms of auxin response, differential exposure to auxin, or a common auxin response system coupled to diverse outputs.
Auxin acts in part by regulating gene expression. Known auxin-regulated
genes fall in several classes including the Aux/IAA family,
the SAUR family, and the GH3 family (Abel and
Theologis, 1996 ). Some of these are transiently expressed within
minutes of auxin application, with subsequent desensitization of
the response, implying that feedback controls dampen auxin
responses (Dominov et al., 1992 ; Abel et al., 1995 ). Many of these
genes can also be induced by the protein synthesis inhibitor
cycloheximide (Franco et al., 1990 ; Abel et al., 1995 ; Gil and Green,
1997 ), suggesting that auxin may derepress transcription and/or
regulate mRNA turnover. Some auxin-regulated genes have tissue-specific
expression patterns, underscoring the diversity of auxin responses in
different tissues (Gee et al., 1991 ; Lehman et al., 1996 ; Wong et al.,
1996 ).
Many auxin-regulated genes have a 5'-TGTCTC-3' DNA sequence motif in
their promoters; in studied cases this motif is required for auxin
responsiveness (for review, see Guilfoyle et al., 1998 ). Proteins
encoded by the ARF (auxin response factor) multigene family
bind to this or similar DNA motifs (Ulmasov et al., 1997a , 1997b ,
1999a , 1999b ). ARF proteins have a conserved N-terminal DNA-binding
domain, and (except for ARF3) share conserved C-terminal domains III
and IV with proteins of the Aux/IAA family (see below). At least in
some combinations, ARF proteins can dimerize with Aux/IAA proteins,
probably through domains III and IV (Kim et al., 1997 ; Ulmasov et al.,
1997b ). Different ARFs can either repress or activate gene expression
from auxin-regulated promoters depending on domains located between the
DNA-binding and dimerization motifs (Ulmasov et al., 1999a ).
Mutations in three different ARF genes have established that
they are important for auxin-mediated development, and revealed that
different ARF factors show specificity in the phenotypes they control.
ettin/arf3 mutations affect floral patterning (Sessions et
al., 1997 ), monopteros/arf5 mutations affect formation of
vasculature (Przemeck et al., 1996 ; Hardtke and Berleth, 1998 ), and
msg1/nph4/arf7 mutations decrease auxin sensitivity in the
hypocotyl and leaf, and cause defective tropic responses and
auxin-regulated gene expression (Liscum and Briggs, 1996 ; Watahiki and
Yamamoto, 1997 ; Stowe-Evans et al., 1998 ; Harper et al., 2000 ).
Arabidopsis has at least 20 IAA genes encoding Aux/IAA
proteins, and those that have been studied are regulated by auxin (Abel et al., 1995 ; Kim et al., 1997 ). Aux/IAA proteins share four conserved domains called I, II, III, and IV. Pea Ps-IAA4 and Ps-IAA6 proteins localize to the nucleus and have half-lives of 6 to 8 min, suggesting that the proteins play transient regulatory roles (Abel et al., 1994 ;
Abel and Theologis, 1995 ). However, there is no evidence that Aux/IAA
proteins bind DNA directly. Yeast two-hybrid screens and in vitro
experiments with purified proteins have shown that Aux/IAA proteins can
homo- and hetero-dimerize, and suggest that domains III and IV are
required for dimerization (Kim et al., 1997 ; Ulmasov et al., 1997b ; Soh
et al., 1999 ). The same studies showed that Aux/IAA proteins can
dimerize with ARF proteins, suggesting that Aux/IAA proteins might act
by modifying transcriptional regulatory activity of ARFs. Aux/IAA
proteins can antagonize auxin-dependent activation of genes in
transfected carrot cells (Ulmasov et al., 1997b ).
Partially dominant mutations in five Arabidopsis IAA genes,
SHY2/IAA3, AXR3/IAA17, MSG2/IAA19,
IAR2/IAA28, and SLR/IAA14, cause related but
distinct phenotypes including slowed root growth (axr3,
shy2, and iar2), few lateral roots
(shy2, msg2, iar2, and slr), decreased gravitropism (axr3,
shy2, msg2, and slr), and leaf
formation in darkness (shy2; Kim et al., 1996 ; Leyser et al., 1996 ; Rouse et al., 1998 ; Rogg et al., 1999 ; Tian and Reed, 1999 ;
M. Tasaka, personal communication; K. Yamamoto, personal communication). axr3-1 and shy2-2 mutations were
deduced to cause a gain of function because they are partially dominant
and can be suppressed by intragenic mutations having molecular
characteristics of loss-of-function alleles (Rouse et al., 1998 ; Tian
and Reed, 1999 ).
The axr2-1 mutant was isolated as having auxin-resistant
root growth, and has several morphological phenotypes including a short
hypocotyl, agravitropic root and shoot growth, and no root hairs
(Wilson et al., 1990 ; Timpte et al., 1992 , 1994 ). Genetic evidence
using triploids showed that axr2-1 causes a gain of function (Timpte et al., 1994 ). We have now cloned AXR2 and find that
it encodes another member of the Aux/IAA protein family, IAA7. We have
also generated loss-of-function mutations in AXR2/IAA7, and we describe the corresponding mutant plants. We have compared several
phenotypes of axr2-1 mutants with those of axr3-1
and shy2-2, and find that the phenotypes differ, implying
that the AXR2/IAA7, AXR3/IAA17, and
SHY2/IAA3 genes have distinct functions.
 |
RESULTS |
The axr2-1 Mutation Is in the IAA7 Gene
We mapped AXR2 to BAC T12C21 on chromosome 3 (Timpte et
al., 1994 ; data not shown). Low-stringency hybridization with an
IAA2 gene probe and public release of the genomic sequence
of the BAC MXC7 (which overlaps with T12C21) revealed that two
IAA genes, IAA2 and IAA7, are about 12 kb apart in this region. We sequenced the IAA2 and
IAA7 genes from the axr2-1 mutant, and found a C to T missense mutation predicted to change a Pro to a Ser at codon 87 in IAA7 (Fig. 1A). This Pro
residue is conserved in all known Aux/IAA proteins, and forms part of
conserved domain II. As shown in Figure 1B, semidominant mutations in
AXR3/IAA17 and SHY2/IAA3 also affect residues in
this domain (Rouse et al., 1998 ; Tian and Reed, 1999 ), and in fact the
shy2-2 mutation causes the identical change, from Pro to
Ser, in the corresponding position of SHY2/IAA3. As described below,
intragenic suppressing mutations confirm that this mutation in
IAA7 is responsible for the phenotypes of axr2-1 plants. We refer to the gene as AXR2/IAA7, in keeping with
the emerging nomenclature for genes of this family identified both by
mutation and by sequence homology (Rouse et al., 1998 ; Tian and Reed,
1999 ).

View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1.
A, Mutations in AXR2/IAA7. The box
represents the coding part of the gene. Dark vertical lines within the
box indicate positions of introns. Stippled boxes indicate conserved
domains I, II, III, and IV. B, Mutations in conserved domain II of
AXR2/IAA7, AXR3/IAA17, and SHY2/IAA3 proteins.
|
|
Isolation of Loss-of-Function axr2 Mutations
Previous genetic experiments demonstrated that axr2-1
causes a gain of function (Timpte et al., 1994 ). To isolate
loss-of-function alleles of AXR2/IAA7, we mutagenized
axr2-1 seeds, and screened among M2 progeny for reversion of
the short hypocotyl phenotype of axr2-1 plants (Timpte et
al., 1994 ). We isolated several revertant individuals that proved to
have one of two different mutations, one identical to that in the
previously described axr2-1-r3 mutant (Timpte et al., 1994 ),
and another that we call axr2-1-r4. These mutations were
each dominant to the wild-type AXR2 allele and recessive to
the axr2-1 allele (Timpte et al., 1994 ; data not shown), and
they were linked to axr2-1, suggesting that they were intragenic suppressors of axr2-1.
We sequenced the AXR2/IAA7 gene from these mutants, and
found mutations in each of them (Fig. 1A). In axr2-1-r3, a G
to A mutation changed Arg at position 138 to Lys. In
axr2-1-r4, a C to T mutation changed Leu at amino acid
position 15 to Phe. This change also eliminated a BsmAI
restriction site. Each of these mutated amino acids is highly conserved
among all known Aux/IAA proteins. Leu-15 is in conserved domain I and
Arg-138 is in conserved domain III. These intragenic suppressors of
axr2-1 confirm that the IAA7 gene is indeed the
same as AXR2.
Both intragenic suppressor mutants had phenotypes similar to each other
and intermediate between those of wild-type and axr2-1 plants (Timpte et al., 1994 ; data not shown). For example,
axr2-1-r3 and axr2-1-r4 root growth was more
sensitive to auxin inhibition than was root growth of axr2-1
plants but less sensitive than was root growth of wild-type plants.
Adult axr2-1-r3 and axr2-1-r4 plants had an
intermediate stature, and their flowering stems grew at an altered
angle less upright than wild-type stems, but more upright than the
weeping growth of axr2-1 mutant plant stems. These
phenotypes suggest that these mutations partially decrease the activity
of AXR2-1 protein.
In addition to these intragenic suppressors, we obtained a T-DNA
insertion allele of AXR2/IAA7. Using a degenerate primer designed to hybridize to DNA encoding conserved domain IV of the IAA
proteins, we screened for insertion mutations in a collection of T-DNA
lines (Krysan et al., 1996 ). Among the mutations we found was an
insertion in the AXR2/IAA7 gene. We refer to this mutation as axr2-5. To define the end points of the insertion
precisely, we PCR-amplified and sequenced a fragment flanking the T-DNA
on the 3' end of the gene. This sequence revealed that the insertion interrupts the second exon at a position corresponding to amino acid
124 in the coding sequence (Fig. 1A). We were not able to amplify the
T-DNA junction on the 5' end of the gene. However, we hybridized a
Southern blot of digests of wild-type and axr2-5 DNA with an
AXR2/IAA7-specific probe, and found that a wild-type 0.5-kb
NsiI fragment was shifted in size in the mutant, whereas all
other NsiI fragments in the AXR2/IAA7 gene were
the same in both the mutant and wild-type DNA (Fig.
2A). This fragment contains the sequenced
3' T-DNA insertion junction, and its shifted size shows that the
axr2-5 mutant lacks an intact AXR2/IAA7 gene.

View larger version (43K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 2.
A, Southern hybridization of wild-type (+) and
axr2-5 ( ) DNA cut with BglII or NsiI
restriction enzymes and probed with an AXR2/IAA7 probe
(left) or a T-DNA probe (right). Horizontal bars indicate bands present
in wild-type DNA but missing in the mutant, and asterisks indicate
bands that are unique to the mutant and hybridize to both probes. B and
C, Northern blots of mRNA from axr2 mutants probed with
AXR2/IAA7 cDNA probes. B, mRNA from wild-type Wassilewskija
and axr2-5, probed with a PCR product derived from an
AXR2/IAA7 cDNA; C, mRNA from wild-type Columbia,
axr2-1, and intragenic suppressors derived from
axr2-1, probed with the 3'-untranslated region of the
AXR2/IAA7 cDNA. Hybridizations of the same two blots with a
-tubulin probe show that the amount of mRNA loaded was roughly equal
in each lane (lower panels).
|
|
To assess whether the axr2-5 mutation affects
AXR2/IAA7 transcript levels, we hybridized blots of mRNA
from wild-type and axr2-5 plants with a probe derived from
an AXR2/IAA7 cDNA (Abel et al., 1995 ). As shown in Figure
2B, this probe recognized two bands in wild-type mRNA, one at the
predicted size of about 0.9 kb, and another larger band of about 1.3 kb. We presume that this larger band arose from cross-hybridization to
a transcript from another IAA gene, as it did not appear
when we used a probe derived from the 3'-untranslated part of the
AXR2/IAA7 cDNA (Fig. 2C). In the axr2-5 mutant,
only the 1.3-kb band appeared, indicating that axr2-5 lacks
AXR2/IAA7 transcript. Together, the disrupted AXR2/IAA7 gene structure and absence of AXR2/IAA7
transcript in this mutant show that axr2-5 is a null mutation.
We also examined expression of AXR2/IAA7 in light-grown
axr2-1, axr2-1-r3, and axr2-1-r4
mutant seedlings, and found that the transcript was present at a lower
level in axr2-1 seedlings than in wild-type seedlings (Fig.
2C). Previous data showed that the AXR2/IAA7 transcript was
also expressed at a lower level in dark-grown axr2-1 mutant
seedlings than in wild-type seedlings (Abel et al., 1995 ). Taken
together, these results suggest that AXR2/IAA7 participates in a
negative autoregulatory feedback loop in both light- and dark-grown
seedlings. axr2-1-r3 and axr2-1-r4 seedlings had
an intermediate level of AXR2/IAA7 transcript (Fig. 2C),
consistent with their intermediate phenotypes.
Phenotypes of axr2-5 Null Mutant Plants
To understand the role of AXR2/IAA7 in development, we examined
morphology of the axr2-5 null mutant. axr2-5
plants appeared very similar to wild-type plants at both seedling and
adult stages. The kinetics of root growth in light-grown wild-type and
mutant plants were almost identical (Fig.
3A). In response to auxin, root growth
was inhibited to the same extent in both wild-type and
axr2-5 plants (Fig. 3C), and root gravitropism appeared
normal in the mutant (data not shown). Lateral root numbers were also the same in the two genotypes, 2.9 ± 3.7 (n = 57)
for wild type versus 3.2 ± 2.3 (n = 57) for
axr2-5 in 2-week-old seedlings.

View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 3.
Growth phenotypes of the axr2-5 T-DNA
insertion mutant. A, Kinetics of root elongation in light-grown
seedlings; B, kinetics of hypocotyl elongation in light-grown
seedlings; C, root growth in the presence of varying amounts of IAA; D,
kinetics of root elongation of dark-grown seedlings; E, kinetics of
hypocotyl elongation of dark-grown seedlings. Error bars indicate
SDs of measurements.
|
|
Shoots of axr2-5 plants also appeared similar to those of
wild-type plants. However, in kinetic studies axr2-5
seedlings had slightly longer hypocotyls than wild-type seedlings did
(Fig. 3B). Both hypocotyls and roots of dark-grown axr2-5
seedlings grew at the same rate as those of wild-type seedlings (Fig.
3, D and E), indicating that the long hypocotyls of light-grown
axr2-5 seedlings reflect a decreased light response. In
constant red or blue light, the increased elongation of
axr2-5 seedling hypocotyls was less than in white light, and
statistically significant in only a subset of experiments (data not
shown). Thus, the phenotype in white light may reflect a combined
effect of the mutation on both blue- and red-light response pathways.
axr2-1 and axr3-1 Mutations Induce
De-Etiolated Morphology in Dark-Grown Seedlings
In contrast to the slightly elongated hypocotyls of
axr2-5 seedlings, gain-of-function axr2-1 mutant
seedlings have short hypocotyls (Timpte et al., 1994 ). This phenotype
was more apparent in dark-grown than light-grown seedlings. Whereas
wild-type seedling hypocotyls were about one-eighth as long in the
light as in the dark, axr2-1 hypocotyls were about one-half
as long in the light as in the dark (Timpte et al., 1994 ). These
results indicate that axr2-1 seedlings responded less than
wild-type seedlings to white light. Relative to elongation in darkness,
axr2-1 seedling hypocotyls also responded less than
wild-type seedlings to blue, red, or far-red light (Fig.
4A), and an axr2-1 phyB-9
double mutant had a hypocotyl length intermediate between those of the
two corresponding single mutants (Fig. 4B). Thus axr2-1
probably does not interfere specifically with function of any
particular photoreceptor.

View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 4.
Effects of axr2-1 and axr3-1
mutations on light responses. A, Hypocotyl lengths of wild-type,
axr2-1, and axr3-1 seedlings grown for 5 d
under different light conditions, normalized to the wild-type hypocotyl
length in the dark ± SD. B, Hypocotyl
lengths of wild-type, axr2-1, axr3-1,
phyB-9, axr2-1 phyB-9, and axr3-1
phyB-9 seedlings grown for 7 d in red light ± SD.
|
|
These results suggested that in dark-grown seedlings the
axr2-1 mutation might activate a developmental pathway
normally activated by light. Consistent with this idea, dark-grown
axr2-1 seedlings made leaves. After 6 d growth in the
dark, wild-type seedlings have a long hypocotyl and no significant
cotyledon or leaf growth. After 23 d in the dark, wild-type
seedlings had open hooks, but still failed to develop visible leaves
(Fig. 5). In contrast, 6-d-old dark-grown
axr2-1 seedlings had short hypocotyls and open and slightly
expanded cotyledons (Timpte et al., 1994 ), and 23-d-old axr2-1 seedlings had true leaves (Fig. 5). On occasion, we
also observed floral buds after 23 d of dark growth.

View larger version (40K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 5.
Appearance of wild-type, axr2-1,
axr3-1, and det1-1 mutant seedlings after 23 d growth in the dark.
|
|
The gain-of-function mutation axr3-1 affecting AXR3/IAA17
caused similar dark phenotypes as the axr2-1 mutation. Thus,
axr3-1 seedlings had short hypocotyls in the dark (Leyser et
al., 1996 ) and had a decreased response to red, far-red, or blue light
(Fig. 4); and they made leaves in the dark (Fig. 5). The
gain-of-function shy2-1, shy2-2, and
shy2-3 mutations affecting SHY2/IAA3 also caused similar
effects (Kim et al., 1996 , 1998 ; Reed et al., 1998 ; Tian and Reed,
1999 ). These results suggest that AXR2/IAA7, AXR3/IAA17, and SHY2/IAA3
can each induce aspects of a de-etiolated developmental program when
activated by mutation.
The de-etiolated phenotypes of axr2-1, axr3-1,
and shy2-2 were less severe than those of the
cop/det/fus class of mutants (Chory et al., 1989 ; Deng et
al., 1991 ). Thus, whereas axr2-1, axr3-1, and
shy2-2 mutants made leaves only after more than 1 week of
dark growth, det1-1 plants had significant leaf expansion after 1 week, and had formed more (and larger) leaves than the other
mutants after 3 weeks (Fig. 5).
axr2-1, axr3-1, shy2-2, and
shy2-3 Plants Have Different Morphologies
Despite having a mutation in a residue corresponding precisely or
closely to dominant shy2-2 or axr3-1 mutations,
the axr2-1 plants differ in several respects from
shy2-2 and axr3-1 plants, as summarized in Table
I. One possible explanation for the
phenotypic differences between axr2-1 or axr3-1
mutants and shy2 mutants could be that, whereas
axr2-1 and axr3-1 are each in the Columbia ecotype, shy2-2 and shy2-3 are in the
Landsberg erecta ecotype. To test whether these ecotype
differences might cause the different effects of the mutations, we
generated Columbia/Landsberg erecta F1
hybrids that were heterozygous for each of these dominant or semidominant mutations, and examined their phenotypes. We found that
all of the root and adult shoot phenotypes that differed among the
mutants also differed among the F1 hybrid plants
(Fig. 6). Thus roots of
axr2-1/+ and axr3-1/+ plants grew
agravitropically and had fewer root hairs than wild-type plants,
whereas roots of shy2-2/+ and shy2-3/+ plants
grew relatively normally and had abundant root hairs;
axr3-1/+ plants, but not the other mutants, had extra
adventitious roots growing from the hypocotyl (data not shown); and
shoots of adult axr2-1/+ plants grew agravitropically, whereas shoots of adult axr3-1/+, shy2-2/+, and
shy2-3/+ plants grew upright. We conclude that the different
phenotypes of the mutants arise from functional differences among the
mutant genes or proteins rather than from ecotypic background
effects.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table I.
Phenotypes of gain-of-function axr2-1, axr3-1, and
shy2-2 mutants
Phenotypes are from the following references: For axr2-1:
Wilson et al. (1990) ; Timpte et al. (1992) ; Timpte et al. (1994) ; this
work. For axr3-1: Leyser et al. (1996) . For
shy2-2: Reed et al. (1998) ; Tian and Reed (1999) . w.t., Wild
type.
|
|

View larger version (112K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Figure 6.
Appearance of Columbia/Landsberg erecta
hybrid plants heterozygous for axr2-1, axr3-1,
shy2-2, or shy2-3. Seedlings were grown on
vertically oriented MS/agar/2% (w/v) Suc plates for 7 d. As shown
in the photograph, axr3-1/+ seedlings frequently grew in
orientations other than upright.
|
|
We also compared the de-etiolation phenotypes conferred by
axr2-1, axr3-1, shy2-2, and
shy2-3 mutations in these Columbia/Landsberg erecta F1 hybrid plants. We found that
after growth for 23 d in the dark, the axr2-1/+ and
axr3-1/+ plants had shorter hypocotyls and a greater
frequency of cotyledon unfolding and leaf primordium growth than the
shy2-2/+ or shy2-3/+ plants (Table
II). These results show that
axr2-1 and axr3-1 mutations cause more extensive de-etiolation than shy2-2 or shy2-3 mutations do,
at least as heterozygotes.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table II.
Phenotypes of dark-grown Columbia/Landsberg erecta
F1 hybrids heterozygous for gain-of-function mutations
Seedlings were grown for 23 d in the dark on MS/agar/2% (w/v) Suc
medium.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
AXR2/IAA7 Controls Seedling Shoot Development in the Light
Plants carrying the axr2-5 insertion allele lack an
intact AXR2/IAA7 gene as well as the corresponding mRNA
transcript, indicating that this allele is a null mutation. Light-grown
axr2-5 seedlings had a slightly longer hypocotyl than
wild-type seedlings, but had normal root growth, auxin inhibition of
root growth, lateral root numbers, and root gravitropism. These results
suggest that AXR2/IAA7 contributes to shoot development, but is not
essential for correct root development. axr2-5 plants grew
normally in the dark, suggesting that AXR2/IAA7 plays little or no role
in development in the dark.
Conversely, plants carrying the gain-of-function mutation
axr2-1 had a short hypocotyl and made leaves in the dark.
These results suggest that the activated AXR2/IAA7 protein in
axr2-1 promotes ectopic light response in dark-grown plants
and that it may normally contribute to light responses.
Photoreceptor-deficient mutants (Koornneef et al., 1980 ) have longer
hypocotyls than the axr2-5 mutant, indicating that if
AXR2/IAA7 acts in a light response pathway, it probably acts
redundantly with other factors. elf3 mutants whose primary
defect may be in interactions between light and the circadian rhythm
also have elongated hypocotyls (Zagotta et al., 1996 ; Reed et al.,
2000 ). However, the shy2-2 mutation caused no discernible
effect on circadian rhythms of CAB expression (D.E. Somers,
personal communication), suggesting that these Aux/IAA proteins do not
play a major role in circadian rhythms.
The de-etiolated morphology of axr2-1, axr3-1,
shy2-2, and shy2-3 mutant seedlings is less
extreme than that of det1-1 mutant. Moreover, dark-grown
shy2-1 mutant plants expressed the CAB and PSBA genes to a lesser extent than the det1-1 or
cop1-1 mutants do (Chory et al., 1989 ; Deng et al., 1991 ;
Kim et al., 1998 ). Therefore, the role of the Aux/IAA proteins in the
de-etiolation response to light may be less global than that of the
DET/COP/FUS group of proteins. One possibility is that the DET/COP/FUS
genes repress one or more IAA genes as well as other genes
involved in de-etiolation (Mayer et al., 1996 ).
The gain-of-function axr2-1 mutation causes additional
dramatic phenotypes that reveal other potential roles of AXR2/IAA7 in
development. Thus, in axr2-1 mutant plants, roots and shoots each grow agravitropically, and roots lack epidermal hairs (Wilson et
al., 1990 ; Timpte et al., 1992 ). These phenotypes reveal that AXR2/IAA7
may control responses to gravity and root hair specification or growth.
The hypothesized redundancy among Aux/IAA proteins (see below) may
explain why we have not observed defects in gravitropism or root growth
in the null mutant.
AXR2/IAA7 May Act Redundantly with AXR3/IAA17 or SHY2/IAA3
The subtle nature of the axr2-5 mutant phenotype
suggests that AXR2/IAA7 may act redundantly with other proteins,
perhaps other members of the Aux/IAA family. A shy2 null
mutation and axr3 loss-of-function mutations also caused
only subtle phenotypes (Rouse et al., 1998 ; Tian and Reed, 1999 ),
supporting this idea. Furthermore, gain-of-function mutations that
activate AXR2/IAA7, AXR3/IAA17, or SHY2/IAA3 each cause short
hypocotyls and leaf formation in the dark, suggesting that these
proteins share regulatory targets. Double mutants carrying null alleles
of axr2 and axr3 or shy2 will allow a
more rigorous test of whether these three genes have redundant functions.
An alternative to redundancy to explain the similar shoot phenotypes of
the gain-of-function mutants is that the Aux/IAA proteins regulate each
other. Aux/IAA proteins can heterodimerize (Kim et al., 1997 ),
providing one potential mechanism for such regulation. These proteins
may also regulate their own or each others' genes. Both
SHY2/IAA3 and AXR2/IAA7 genes are expressed at a
lower level in the axr2-1 mutant (Abel et al., 1995 ; see
Fig. 2), suggesting that AXR2/IAA7 regulates expression of both its own
gene and SHY2/IAA3. SHY2/IAA3 might also be upstream of
AXR2/IAA7 in a regulatory cascade. Auxin application induced
SHY2/IAA3 within minutes, but induced AXR2/IAA7
more slowly, suggesting that SHY2/IAA3 is part of a primary
response to auxin, whereas AXR2/IAA7 is part of a secondary
response (Abel et al., 1995 ). ARF proteins may mediate these putative
regulatory interactions, as these can dimerize with Aux/IAA proteins
(Kim et al., 1997 ; Ulmasov et al., 1997b ), and can bind to
auxin-responsive promoters (Ulmasov et al., 1997a , 1999a ).
Different Aux/IAA Proteins Influence Arabidopsis Development
Differently
Whereas axr2-1, axr3-1, shy2-1,
shy2-2, and shy2-3 seedlings have quite similar
seedling shoot phenotypes, they differ in root phenotypes and in adult
shoot phenotypes (Timpte et al., 1992 , 1994 ; Kim et al., 1996 , 1998 ;
Leyser et al., 1996 ; Reed et al., 1998 ; Tian and Reed, 1999 ). Table I
compares the morphological and auxin response phenotypes of the
axr2-1, axr3-1, and shy2-2 mutants.
Roots of axr2-1 and axr3-1 mutant plants grow
extremely agravitropically, and they lack root hairs (Wilson et al.,
1990 ; Leyser et al., 1996 ). In contrast, roots of shy2-2 and
shy2-3 mutant plants have normal gravitropism, although they
readjust to a shift in gravity more slowly than wild-type plants, and
they have abundant root hairs (Tian and Reed, 1999 ). Furthermore,
axr2-1 and axr3-1 mutant roots respond
substantially less than wild-type roots to auxin, whereas
shy2-2 or shy2-3 root growth is almost as
sensitive to auxin as is root growth of wild-type plants. In an assay
for adventitious root formation from the hypocotyl (Tian and Reed,
1999 ), we observed that axr2-1 plants made fewer
adventitious roots than wild-type plants (0.3 ± 0.5 for
axr2-1 and 2.8 ± 1.5 for wild type). In this respect,
axr2-1 seedlings resemble shy2-2 and
shy2-3 seedlings more closely than they do axr3-1
seedlings, which have extra adventitious roots (Leyser et al., 1996 ).
Morphologies of adult shoots also differ significantly.
axr2-1 shoots weep rather than growing upward as wild-type
shoots do (Wilson et al., 1990 ). Adult axr3-1 plants have
normal shoot orientation but fewer lateral shoot branches (Leyser et
al., 1996 ). Finally, shy2-2 or shy2-3 shoots have
apparently normal gravitropism and branching (Tian and Reed, 1999 ).
Gain-of-function mutations in domain II of MSG2/IAA19,
SLR/IAA14, and IAR2/IAA28 genes also cause
related but distinct phenotypes (Rogg et al., 1999 ; M. Tasaka, personal communication; K. Yamamoto, personal communication). These phenotypic differences suggest that the IAA genes may not be truly
redundant for all functions.
Our experiments with F1 hybrids, and the change
of Pro to Ser at the corresponding position in axr2-1 and
shy2-2 mutations, show that differences in allele strength
or ecotypic background do not account for these phenotypic differences.
Instead, differences in functional properties of the proteins or in
expression patterns may be more important. Northern-blot analyses
showed that AXR2/IAA7 and SHY2/IAA3 were each
expressed in similar tissues (Abel et al., 1995 ), suggesting that
expression patterns may not account for the differences. However, the
kinetics of induction of these genes were different (see above), and
more detailed localization and kinetic studies will be required to
resolve this question.
axr2 Mutations Reveal Domains Important for AXR2/IAA7
Protein Function
The collected results from mutations in six different
IAA genes suggest that domain II plays a key role in the
function of various Aux/IAA proteins, and that it may be a target for
regulatory action of auxin or some other signal. One model to explain
the potency of mutations in domain II is that this domain causes
Aux/IAA proteins to be degraded quickly. Pea Ps-IAA4 and Ps-IAA6
proteins have very short half-lives (Abel et al., 1994 ), and one way to increase the activity of Aux/IAA proteins may be to stabilize them.
Indeed, fusion proteins with Ps-IAA6 are degraded rapidly in plant
cells, and mutations in domain II appear to decrease this degradation
(Worley et al., 2000 ). One attractive possibility is that
Aux/ IAA proteins are substrates for ubiquitin-mediated degradation.
Mutations in components of a ubiquitin-protein ligase called
SCFTIR1 reduce auxin response (Ruegger et al.,
1998 ; Gray et al., 1999 ). Thus, it is possible that
SCFTIR1 functions to ubiquitinate the Aux/IAA
proteins, resulting in their degradation. Recent studies also suggest
that SCFTIR1 is in turn regulated by modification
by the ubiquitin-related protein RUB1 (del Pozo and Estelle,
1999 ). Mutations in genes that function in the RUB pathway also
result in a defect in auxin response (del Pozo et al., 1998 ).
The axr2-1-r3 and axr2-1-r4 mutants have shorter
hypocotyls than wild-type plants and altered adult shoot gravitropism;
and are dominant to the wild-type allele for these phenotypes.
Considering that the null allele axr2-5 confers much more
subtle phenotypes, it seems likely that the axr2-1-r3 and
axr2-1-r4 mutations cause just a partial loss of function,
and that these phenotypes are caused by residual activity of AXR2-1
protein. axr2-1-r4 and axr2-1-r3 mutations affect
conserved domains I and III of AXR2/IAA7. Intragenic suppressor mutations of axr3-1 in the corresponding domains
of AXR3/IAA17 also conferred phenotypes intermediate between
those of wild type and those of the starting gain-of-function mutant (Rouse et al., 1998 ). Thus it appears that domains I and III are important to the function of at least two members of the IAA family, as
would be predicted based on sequence conservation.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Genetic Material
The auxin-resistant mutants axr2-1 and
axr3-1 and the null phytochrome B photoreceptor mutant
phyB-9 are in the Columbia ecotype background (Wilson et
al., 1990 ; Reed et al., 1993 ; Leyser et al., 1996 ).
shy2-2 and shy2-3 mutants are in the
Landsberg erecta ecotype (Reed et al., 1998 ). The
insertion mutation axr2-5 is in the Wassilewskija ecotype.
Mapping, Sequencing, and Hybridizations
We mapped AXR2 relative to known cleaved
amplified polymorphic sequence and RFLP markers and new polymorphic
markers derived from BAC and YAC ends (data not shown). To sequence
axr2 mutant alleles, we amplified the
AXR2/IAA7 gene from axr2 mutants in 10 individual polymerase chain reactions, purified the pooled reactions
through a Sephadex G50 column, and sequenced the products directly.
Sequencing was performed by the University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill sequencing facility. Primers used were designed based on the
genomic DNA sequence of the AXR2/IAA7 gene. We did not
sequence all of the intron DNA. However, mRNA hybridizations showed
that the mutants had AXR2/IAA7 transcript of the correct size (Fig. 2C). Genomic DNA was isolated as described previously (Krysan et al., 1996 ) from seedlings grown for 8 d in liquid
MS (1× MS salts [Gibco/BRL, Grand Island, NY], 1× Gamborg's
vitamin mix [Sigma, St. Louis])/2% (w/v) Suc. Total RNA was
isolated from seedlings grown under these conditions using Trizol
reagent (Gibco/BRL), and poly(A+) RNA was isolated using
oligo(dT)25 Dynabeads according to manufacturer's instructions (Dynal, Lake Success, NY). mRNA isolated from 50 µg of
total RNA was run on formaldehyde gels and blotted to nylon membranes
(Hybond N, Amersham, Piscataway, NJ). 32P-Labeled probes
were made using a random priming kit (Boehringer Mannheim,
Indianapolis). For Southern hybridizations, probes were made from a
full-length IAA7 cDNA clone (Abel et al., 1995 ) or from
plasmid pD991 containing the T-DNA used to make the mutant population
(a gift of Tom Jack, Dartmouth University, Hanover, NH). For
northern hybridizations, probes were made from either a PCR product
spanning domains II to IV of the AXR2/IAA7 cDNA (Fig.
2B) or a 268-bp fragment including only the 3'-untranslated region of
the cDNA after a BglII restriction site near the end of
the coding sequence (Fig. 2C). Hybridizations were done as described
(Church and Gilbert, 1984 ). Membranes were washed in 2× SSC once for
15 min, followed by 0.2× SSC, 0.1% (w/v) SDS twice for 15 min each at
65°C, and then exposed to x-ray films (Eastman-Kodak, Rochester, NY).
Isolation of an Insertion Mutation in IAA7
We designed a degenerate oligodeoxyribonucleotide [IAAdIV30mer,
5'-ACTCCCA(A/T/C) GGAACATC(G/A/T) CC(G/A/T) AC(G/A/C) AGCATCC-3'] predicted to hybridize to DNA encoding conserved domain IV of multiple
members of the Arabidopsis IAA gene family. IAAdIV30mer had 81-fold redundancy and was expected to hybridize to 18 of the known
IAA genes with zero to three mismatches to any one gene. We amplified from template DNA derived from pools of T-DNA insertion lines, using IAAdIV30mer and primers specific to the ends of the T-DNA
as described previously (Krysan et al., 1996 ). Among the insertion
mutations identified, one fell in IAA7. In this mutant, we could amplify a 0.6-kb fragment using the degenerate primer and the
T-DNA left border primer, but we were unable to amplify the
IAA7 gene using gene-specific primers flanking the T-DNA
insertion site. We will describe mutants in other IAA
genes obtained in this screen elsewhere.
Growth Conditions and Phenotypic Measurements
Seedlings were surface sterilized and plated on MS/agar plates
(1× MS salts [Gibco/BRL], 0.8% [w/v] phytagar [Gibco/BRL], and
1× Gamborg's B5 vitamin mix [Sigma]) with or without 2% (w/v) Suc,
stored overnight at 4°C, and moved to the appropriate light condition. Growth temperature was 21°C. For dark growth, seedlings were induced to germinate by treatment with 6 to 18 h of white light. For root growth response to exogenous auxin, seedlings were
grown under white light at 21°C on vertically oriented MS/agar/2% (w/v) Suc plates for 5 d to allow the roots to grow along the surface, and 20 seedlings per treatment were transferred to new plates
supplemented with various concentrations of IAA. The positions of root
tips of all seedlings were marked, and the amount of new root growth
was measured after 3 d. Hypocotyl and root lengths were measured
with a ruler or with NIH Image software after taking an image of the
seedlings with a CCD camera. Inhibition of hypocotyl elongation by red,
far-red, or blue light was assayed as described previously (Reed et
al., 1998 ). Red-, far-red-, and blue-light fluence rates were
approximately 10 µmol m 2 s 1.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
We thank A. Diener for providing the Arlim-15 cleaved amplified
polymorphic sequence marker and A. Theologis and T. Jack for plasmid clones.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
Received December 1, 1999; accepted February 26, 2000.
1
This work was supported by the National
Institutes of Health (grant nos. R29-GM52456 to J.W.R., R01-GM43644
to M.E., and post-doctoral fellowship GM16611 to L.M.W.).
2
Present address: Department of Biology, Illinois
Wesleyan University, P.O. Box 2900, Bloomington, IL 61702-2900.
3
Present address: Department of Biological
Science, University of New Orleans, New Orleans, LA 70148.
4
Present address: Institute for Cellular and
Molecular Biology, Section of Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental
Biology, University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712.
*
Corresponding author; e-mail jreed{at}emailunc.edu; fax
919-962-1625.
 |
LITERATURE CITED |
-
Abel S, Nguyen MD, Theologis A
(1995)
The PS-IAA4/5-like family of early auxin-inducible mRNAs in Arabidopsis thaliana.
J Mol Biol
251: 533-549
[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
-
Abel S, Oeller PW, Theologis A
(1994)
Early auxin-induced genes encode short-lived nuclear proteins.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
91: 326-330
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Abel S, Theologis A
(1995)
A polymorphic bipartite motif signals nuclear targeting of early auxin-inducible proteins related to PS-IAA4 from pea (Pisum sativum).
Plant J
8: 87-96
[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
-
Abel S, Theologis A
(1996)
Early genes and auxin action.
Plant Physiol
111: 9-17
[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
-
Chory J, Peto C, Feinbaum R, Pratt L, Ausubel F
(1989)
Arabidopsis thaliana mutant that develops as a light-grown plant in the absence of light.
Cell
58: 991-999
[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
-
Church GM, Gilbert W
(1984)
Genomic sequencing.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
81: 1991-1995
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
del Pozo JC, Estelle M
(1999)
The Arabidopsis cullin AtCUL1 is modified by the ubiquitin-related protein RUB1.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
96: 15342-15347
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
del Pozo JC, Timpte C, Tan S, Callis J, Estelle M
(1998)
The ubiquitin-related protein RUB1 and auxin responses in Arabidopsis.
Science
280: 1760-1763
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Deng X-W, Caspar T, Quail P
(1991)
cop1: a regulatory locus involved in light-controlled development and gene expression in Arabidopsis.
Genes Dev
5: 1172-1182
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Dominov JA, Stenzler L, Lee S, Schwartz JJ, Leisner S, Howell SH
(1992)
Cytokinins and auxins control the expression of a gene in Nicotiana plumbaginifolia cells by feedback regulation.
Plant Cell
4: 451-461
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Franco AR, Gee MA, Guilfoyle TJ
(1990)
Induction and superinduction of auxin-responsive mRNAs with auxin and protein synthesis inhibitors.
J Biol Chem
265: 15845-15849
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Gee MA, Hagen G, Guilfoyle TJ
(1991)
Tissue-specific and organ-specific expression of soybean auxin-responsive transcripts GH3 and SAURs.
Plant Cell
3: 419-430
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Gil P, Green PJ
(1997)
Regulatory activity exerted by the SAUR-AC1 promoter region in transgenic plants.
Plant Mol Biol
34: 803-808
[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
-
Goldsmith MHM
(1977)
The polar transport of auxin.
Annu Rev Plant Physiol
28: 439-478
-
Gray WM, del Pozo JC, Walker L, Hobbie L, Risseeuw E, Banks T, Crosby WL, Yang M, Ma H, Estelle M
(1999)
Identification of an SCF ubiquitin-ligase complex required for auxin response in Arabidopsis thaliana.
Genes Dev
13: 1678-1691
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Guilfoyle T, Hagen G, Ulmasov T, Murfett J
(1998)
How does auxin turn on genes?
Plant Physiol
118: 341-347
[Free Full Text]
-
Hardtke CS, Berleth T
(1998)
The Arabidopsis gene MONOPTEROS encodes a transcription factor mediating embryo axis formation and vascular development.
EMBO J
17: 1405-1411
[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
-
Harper RM, Stowe-Evans EL, Luesse DR, Muto H, Tatematsu K, Watahiki MK,
Yamamoto K, Liscum E (2000) The NPH4 locus encodes the
auxin response factor ARF7, a conditional regulator of differential
growth in aerial Arabidopsis tissues. Plant Cell (in press)
-
Kim BC, Soh MS, Hong SH, Furuya M, Nam HG
(1998)
Photomorphogenic development of the Arabidopsis shy2- 1D mutation and its interaction with phytochromes in darkness.
Plant J
15: 61-68
[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
-
Kim BC, Soh MS, Kang BJ, Furuya M, Nam HG
(1996)
Two dominant photomorphogenic mutations of Arabidopsis thaliana identified as suppressor mutations of hy2.
Plant J
9: 441-456
[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
-
Kim J, Harter K, Theologis A
(1997)
Protein-protein interactions among the Aux/IAA proteins.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
94: 11786-11791
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Koornneef M, Rolff E, Spruit CJP
(1980)
Genetic control of light-inhibited hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis thaliana (L.) Heynh.
Z Pflanzenphysiol
100: 147-160
-
Krysan PJ, Young JC, Tax F, Sussman MR
(1996)
Identification of transferred DNA insertions within Arabidopsis genes involved in signal transduction and ion transport.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
93: 8145-8150
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Lehman A, Black R, Ecker JR
(1996)
HOOKLESS1, an ethylene response gene, is required for differential cell elongation in the Arabidopsis hypocotyl.
Cell
85: 183-194
[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
-
Leyser HMO, Pickett FB, Dharmasiri S, Estelle M
(1996)
Mutations in the AXR3 gene of Arabidopsis result in altered auxin response including ectopic expression from the SAUR-AC1 promoter.
Plant J
10: 403-413
[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
-
Liscum E, Briggs WR
(1996)
Mutations of Arabidopsis in potential transduction and response components of the phototropic signaling pathway.
Plant Physiol
112: 291-296
[Abstract]
-
Liu C-M, Xu Z-H, Chua N-H
(1993)
Auxin polar transport is essential for the establishment of bilateral symmetry during early plant development.
Plant Cell
5: 621-630
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Mayer R, Raventos D, Chua N-H
(1996)
det1, cop1, and cop9 mutations cause inappropriate expression of several gene sets.
Plant Cell
8: 1951-1959
[Abstract]
-
Przemeck GKH, Mattsson J, Hardtke CS, Sung ZR, Berleth T
(1996)
Studies on the role of the Arabidopsis gene MONOPTEROS in vascular development and plant cell axialization.
Planta
200: 229-237
[ISI][Medline]
-
Reed JW, Elumalai RP, Chory J
(1998)
Suppressors of an Arabidopsis thaliana phyB mutation identify genes that control light signalling and hypocotyl elongation.
Genetics
148: 1295-1310
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Reed JW, Nagpal P, Bastow R, Solomon KS, Dowson-Day MJ, Elumalai RP, Millar AJ
(2000)
Independent action of ELF3 and phyB to control hypocotyl elongation and flowering.
Plant Physiol
122: 1149-1160
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Reed JW, Nagpal P, Poole DS, Furuya M, Chory J
(1993)
Mutations in the gene for the red/far-red light receptor phytochrome B alter cell elongation and physiological responses throughout Arabidopsis development.
Plant Cell
5: 147-157
[Abstract]
-
Rogg LE, Lasswell J, Bartel B
(1999)
Cloning and characterization of IAR2, a gene involved in IAA responses in Arabidopsis thaliana (abstract no. 735).
Plant Physiol
120: S-156
-
Rouse D, Mackay P, Stirnberg P, Estelle M, Leyser O
(1998)
Changes in auxin response from mutations in an AUX/IAA gene.
Science
279: 1371-1373
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Ruegger M, Dewey E, Gray WM, Hobbie L, Turner J, Estelle M
(1998)
The TIR1 protein of Arabidopsis functions in auxin response and is related to human SKP2 and yeast Grr1p.
Genes Dev
12: 198-207
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Sabatini S, Beis D, Wolkenfelt H, Murfett J, Guilfoyle T, Malamy J, Benfey P, Leyser O, Bechtold N, Weisbeek P, Scheres B
(1999)
An auxin-dependent distal organizer of pattern and polarity in the Arabidopsis root.
Cell
99: 463-472
[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
-
Sachs T
(1991)
Pattern Formation in Plant Tissues. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
-
Sessions A, Nemhauser JL, McColl A, Roe JL, Feldmann KA, Zambryski PC
(1997)
ETTIN patterns the Arabidopsis floral meristem and reproductive organs.
Development
124: 4481-4491
[Abstract]
-
Soh MS, Hong SH, Kim BC, Vizir I, Park DH, Choi G, Hong MY, Chung Y-Y, Furuya M, Nam HG
(1999)
Regulation of both light- and auxin-mediated development by the Arabidopsis IAA3/SHY2 gene.
J Plant Biol
42: 239-246
-
Stowe-Evans EL, Harper RM, Motchoulski AV, Liscum E
(1998)
NPH4, a conditional modulator of auxin-dependent differential growth responses in Arabidopsis.
Plant Physiol
118: 1265-1275
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Thimann KV
(1977)
Hormone Action in the Whole Life of Plants. University of Massachusetts Press, Amherst, MA
-
Tian Q, Reed JW
(1999)
Control of auxin-regulated root development by the Arabidopsis thaliana SHY2/IAA3 gene.
Development
126: 711-721
[Abstract]
-
Timpte C, Wilson A, 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]
-
Timpte CS, Wilson AK, Estelle M
(1992)
Effects of the axr2 mutation of Arabidopsis on cell shape in hypocotyl and inflorescence.
Planta
188: 271-278
[CrossRef][ISI]
-
Uggla C, Mellerowicz EJ, Sundberg B
(1998)
Indole-3-acetic acid controls cambial growth in Scots pine by positional signaling.
Plant Physiol
117: 113-121
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Ulmasov T, Hagen G, Guilfoyle TJ
(1997a)
ARF1, a transcription factor that binds to auxin response elements.
Science
276: 1865-1868
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Ulmasov T, Hagen G, Guilfoyle TJ
(1999a)
Activation and repression of transcription by auxin-response factors.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
96: 5844-5849
[Abstract/Free Full Text]
-
Ulmasov T, Hagen G, Guilfoyle TJ
(1999b)
Dimerization and DNA binding of auxin response factors.
Plant J
19: 309-319
[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
-
Ulmasov T, Murfett J, Hagen G, Guilfoyle TJ
(1997b)
Aux/IAA proteins repress expression of reporter genes containing natural and highly active synthetic auxin response elements.
Plant Cell
9: 1963-1971
[Abstract]
-
Watahiki MK, Yamamoto K
(1997)
The massagu1 mutation of Arabidopsis identified with failure of auxin-induced growth curvature of hypocotyl confers auxin insensitivity to hypocotyl and leaf.
Plant Physiol
115: 419-426
[Abstract]
-
Wilson AK, Pickett FB, Turner JC, Estelle M
(1990)
A dominant mutation in Arabidopsis confers resistance to auxin, ethylene and abscisic acid.
Mol Gen Genet
222: 377-383
[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
-
Wong LM, Abel S, Shen N, de la Foata M, Mall Y, Theologis A
(1996)
Differential activation of the primary auxin response genes, PS-IAA4/5 and PS-IAA6, during early plant development.
Plant J
9: 587-599
[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
-
Worley CK, Zenser N, Ramos J, Rouse D, Leyser O, Theologis A, Callis J
(2000)
Degradation of Aux/IAA proteins is essential for normal auxin signaling.
Plant J
21: 553-562
[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
-
Zagotta MT, Hicks KA, Jacobs CI, Young JC, Hangarter RP, Meeks-Wagner DR
(1996)
The Arabidopsis ELF3 gene regulates vegetative photomorphogenesis and the photoperiodic induction of flowering.
Plant J
10: 691-702
[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
© 2000 American Society of Plant Physiologists
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
B. K. Zolman, N. Martinez, A. Millius, A. R. Adham, and B. Bartel
Identification and Characterization of Arabidopsis Indole-3-Butyric Acid Response Mutants Defective in Novel Peroxisomal Enzymes
Genetics,
September 1, 2008;
180(1):
237 - 251.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Christian, W. B. Hannah, H. Luthen, and A. M. Jones
Identification of auxins by a chemical genomics approach
J. Exp. Bot.,
July 1, 2008;
59(10):
2757 - 2767.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
T. Uehara, Y. Okushima, T. Mimura, M. Tasaka, and H. Fukaki
Domain II Mutations in CRANE/IAA18 Suppress Lateral Root Formation and Affect Shoot Development in Arabidopsis thaliana
Plant Cell Physiol.,
July 1, 2008;
49(7):
1025 - 1038.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D.-L. Yang, Q. Li, Y.-W. Deng, Y.-G. Lou, M.-Y. Wang, G.-X. Zhou, Y.-Y. Zhang, and Z.-H. He
Altered Disease Development in the eui Mutants and Eui Overexpressors Indicates that Gibberellins Negatively Regulate Rice Basal Disease Resistance
Mol Plant,
May 13, 2008;
(2008)
ssn021v2.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|