|
|
||||||||
|
First published online September 10, 2008; 10.1104/pp.108.125385 Plant Physiology 148:1453-1464 (2008) © 2008 American Society of Plant Biologists
Functional Specialization of the TRANSPARENT TESTA GLABRA1 Network Allows Differential Hormonal Control of Laminal and Marginal Trichome Initiation in Arabidopsis Rosette Leaves1,[W]Department of Plant Systems Biology, Flanders Institute for Biotechnology and Department of Molecular Genetics, Ghent University, 9052 Ghent, Belgium
Trichome initiation in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) is controlled by the TRANSPARENT TESTA GLABRA1 (TTG1) network that consists of R2R3- and R1-type MYB-related transcription factors, basic helix-loop-helix (bHLH) proteins, and the WD40 protein TTG1. An experimental method was designed to investigate the molecular mechanisms by which jasmonates, cytokinins, and gibberellins modulate Arabidopsis leaf trichome formation. All three phytohormones provoked a seemingly common effect on cell patterning by promoting trichome initiation but caused strikingly distinct effects on cell and trichome maturation. The phytohormonal control was mediated by transcriptional regulation of the established TTG1 complex and depended on the R2R3-MYB factor GLABRA1. However, unsuspected degrees of functional specialization of the bHLH factors and a resultant differential molecular regulation of trichome initiation on leaf lamina and leaf margins were revealed. Trichome formation on leaf lamina relied entirely on GLABRA3 and ENHANCER OF GLABRA3. Conversely, TRANSPARENT TESTA8 (TT8) was particularly important for marginal trichome development. This hitherto unknown role for TT8 in trichome formation further underscored the functional redundancy between the three TTG1-dependent bHLH proteins.
Trichomes of Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) are developmentally important because they are involved in temperature control, water regulation, and protection against insect herbivores and UV irradiation (Traw and Bergelson, 2003
Trichome patterns are generated by an activator/inhibitor system (Schellmann et al., 2002
Similar TTG1/bHLH/MYB complexes consisting of the same and/or other isoforms underlie root hair organogenesis, stomata patterning on hypocotyls, seed coat mucilage production, and control of phenylpropanoid biosynthesis (Zhang et al., 2003
Previous research has pointed out that a number of phytohormones play an important role in trichome development. On Arabidopsis rosette leaves, trichome formation is negatively influenced by salicylic acid and positively influenced by GA3 and jasmonic acid (JA; Chien and Sussex, 1996 To study the molecular regulation of phytohormone-modulated trichome density on Arabidopsis rosette leaves, an experimental method was designed in which plants were first allowed to germinate on hormone-free medium before their transfer to hormone-supplemented medium. Here, we verified the trichome-stimulating potential of GA3, JA, and BAP. Whereas these hormones all increased trichome initiation, their effects on anthocyanin biosynthesis, trichome structure, and pavement cell formation differed distinctly. Detailed molecular analysis indicated that the positive effect of these hormones is mediated, at least in part, by the transcriptional regulation of the members of the TTG1/bHLH/MYB activator/inhibitor complex. Furthermore, our analysis pointed toward a differential regulation of marginal and laminal leaf trichome initiation and supported a hitherto unknown, but important, role for TT8 in trichome development.
Experimental Design to Study the Hormonal Influence on Trichome Formation A robust experimental method was designed that allowed tight scoring the effects of the phytohormones JA, GA3, and BAP, whose positive involvement in the regulation of trichome formation had been suggested previously in the literature. Seeds of the Arabidopsis ecotype Columbia 0 (Col-0) were first germinated on control medium (K1) on which "normal" trichome initiation takes place. When the first four leaves were formed, seedlings were transferred to phytohormone-containing medium, on which they remained until the new leaves reached a size appropriate to explore the effect on trichome formation.
To determine at what stage trichome initiation is modulated by the phytohormones, we first compared the effect on the trichome numbers on leaves 3 and 4 with those on leaves 7 and 8. The former were already created before transfer and, thereby, supposed to have an established epidermal cell fate. Leaf 7 and consecutive leaves were formed upon or after the transfer (Larkin et al., 1996
To verify whether the increase in trichome density was due to a direct effect on trichome initiation or to an indirect effect through pleiotropic effects on leaf development, we determined the trichome index (TI), which takes both the number of epidermal cells and the number of trichomes into account. The TI is calculated by the formula (numbers of trichomes/numbers of trichomes + numbers of pavement and guard cells) x 100 (Supplemental Table S1). The three hormones clearly increased the TI, confirming that BAP, GA3, and JA all can positively affect at least one aspect of leaf development (i.e. trichome formation; Fig. 1B; Supplemental Table S1). As for the trichome numbers, a marked effect on the TI was only observed from leaf 7 on.
As GAs and cytokinins are known to act antagonistically in leaf formation and meristem maintenance, the effects of the phytohormones on leaf and trichome development were studied in more detail to discern potentially divergent hormone specificities. The parameters assessed were leaf nuclear DNA content and pavement cell size (Fig. 2
), trichome size and structure, and nuclear DNA content (Figs. 3
and 4
). Leaf 7 was used throughout. Nuclear DNA content reflects the endoreduplication rate, a feature that is often correlated positively with cell size (Melaragno et al., 1993
Three general trends were discernible. First, BAP stimulated cell division and differentiation but prevented or delayed maturation of cells, independently of their developmental fate. The influence of BAP was particularly reflected by an increase in the number of cells and trichomes per leaf (Figs. 1 and 2; Supplemental Table S1) and a decrease in nuclear ploidy levels or DNA content, both in leaves (Fig. 2) and trichomes (Fig. 3). Endoreduplication rates correlated positively with cell size, as mirrored by the small leaf pavement cells (Fig. 2) and short trichomes (Fig. 4) of BAP-treated leaves. The inhibitory effect of BAP on trichome maturation was also apparent from the absence of surface papillae (Fig. 4A), the formation of which is correlated with the cell wall changes that occur normally during trichome maturation (Rerie et al., 1994 Second, the influence of GA3 and JAs on endoreduplication and cell maturation depended seemingly on the developmental fate, contrary to cytokinins. For instance, pavement cells of GA3-treated leaves were larger than those of the control (Fig. 2; Supplemental Table S1), an event accompanied by an additional round of endoreduplication (Fig. 2). In contrast, no significant differences in leaf cell number and size or in leaf nuclear ploidy levels were observed in JA-treated leaves when compared with mock-treated leaves (Fig. 2; Supplemental Table S1). Conversely, JA-treated trichomes had higher DNA contents and an enlarged nuclear area, whereas trichomes of GA3-treated and mock-treated plants did not significantly differ for any of the scored parameters (Fig. 3). Accordingly, trichome outgrowth was clearly stimulated in JA-treated plants, as reflected by the increase in trichome branch size (Fig. 4). Third, the three phytohormones distinctly affected cell pattern formation and maturation depending on the epidermal cell fate. Remarkably, the stomatal index (Supplemental Table S1) was only affected by GA3, further underscoring the cell type-specific effect of the phytohormones on developmental pattern formation. Furthermore, GA3, JA, and BAP differentially regulated trichome maturation, despite the shared promotion of the trichome formation.
To characterize the molecular mechanisms behind the phytohormone-mediated control of trichome formation, we evaluated the transcriptional regulation of the genes coding for known components of the trichome initiation machinery by quantitative (q)PCR. Previously it was reported that the promotion of trichome formation by GAs in rosette leaves was accompanied by up-regulation of GL1 (Perazza et al., 1998
Phytohormone-Mediated Trichome Initiation Is Not Consistently Linked with Anthocyanin Biosynthesis Because trichome initiation and leaf anthocyanin production are regulated by the same bHLH proteins (GL3 and EGL3) in a TTG1-dependent manner, we verified whether the increase in trichome number consistently correlated with an increase in anthocyanin accumulation. Interestingly, whereas JA and BAP both increased anthocyanin production, GA3 did not (Supplemental Fig. S3A), indicating that different phytohormones can specifically impinge on particular components of the TTG1-dependent complexes, despite the partly shared molecular machinery. Correspondingly, JA and BAP, but not GA3, induced expression of the bHLH (TT8) and R2R3-MYB (PAP1 and PAP2) factors dedicated to the regulation of anthocyanin biosynthesis (Supplemental Fig. S3B).
Since the phytohormone-mediated increase in trichome initiation correlated with transcriptional up-regulation of the known activator components of the trichome initiation network, we assessed whether this hormonal effect depended exclusively on these components. Therefore, we analyzed the trichome-promoting effects of the three phytohormones on several glabrous Arabidopsis mutants deficient in TTG1 network components. Surprisingly, the phytohormones were found to impinge differently on the trichome initiation machinery depending on the leaf zone, namely lamina versus margin. None of the phytohormones could fully restore the trichome formation on the leaf lamina in any of the ttg1, gl3egl3, and gl1 mutants (Fig. 6
). Sporadically, small trichome-primordium-like structures were formed on the leaf lamina of ttg1 mutants (Fig. 6B), indicating that the phytohormone-mediated induction of laminal trichome initiation depends exclusively on the known WD40, bHLH, and MYB elements. However, trichome formation was induced at the leaf margin in the ttg1 and gl3egl3 mutants, but not in the gl1 mutant. Because simultaneous overexpression of GL3 and EGL3 can suppress the ttg1 trichome defect (Zhang et al., 2003
TT8 Plays an Important Role in Marginal Trichome Development A potential candidate for the induction of marginal trichomes in the gl3egl3 double mutant was TT8, which hitherto was not linked with trichome initiation. Analysis of the gl3egl3tt8 triple mutant showed that the phytohormone-mediated induction of marginal trichomes in the gl3egl3 background was completely abolished in the triple mutant (Fig. 6). Hence, TT8 might be involved in the establishment of marginal trichomes, at least in certain genetic backgrounds and under certain conditions, such as phytohormone elicitation. To verify whether TT8 is involved also in marginal trichome initiation in the presence of GL3 and EGL3 and in "normal" growth medium, we checked the marginal trichome development in tt8 single mutants grown in the absence of exogenously added hormones. No trichomes could be detected at the margin of young developing tt8 leaves (Fig. 7, A–C ). To assess whether marginal trichome development depended exclusively on TT8, we also verified the marginal trichome development on gl3 seedling leaves (Fig. 7, A–C). Young developing gl3 leaves lacked marginal trichomes, a phenotype further enhanced in the tt8gl3 double mutant. Hence, both TT8 and GL3 seem to be involved in and required for marginal trichome induction.
To determine whether TT8 and GL3 are essential for trichome development on margins or rather control its timing, single and double mutants were scored for (marginal) trichome numbers on young developing leaves and adult leaves (of 1-week-old and 4-week-old seedlings, respectively). This quantitative analysis indicated that marginal trichome formation was almost completely impaired in developing leaves of tt8 and gl3 single and double mutants. Laminal trichome formation still occurred, albeit slightly reduced, both in tt8 and gl3 mutants (Fig. 7B). In adult leaves, marginal trichome formation was still decreased, most clearly in tt8gl3 but also in the single tt8 and, to a lesser extent, gl3 mutants (16%, 41%, and 72% of the Col-0 level, respectively), indicating that both TT8 and GL3 are essential for trichome development on margins, independently of the developmental stage. Possibly, EGL3 also might participate, because marginal trichome development was still observed on (adult) tt8gl3 leaves. Moreover, when the tt8 and gl3 single and double mutants were subjected to phytohormone treatment, marginal trichome development was restored, further supporting the functional redundancy of TT8, GL3, and, probably, EGL3 (Fig. 7D).
GL3 has been postulated to act in a negative autoregulatory loop (Morohashi et al., 2007 Nonetheless, the altered transcriptional regulation of bHLH genes could be responsible for the marginal trichome phenotypes in the single bHLH mutants, because the conditional mutual presence was overcome by phytohormonal treatment in both the gl3 and tt8 mutants (Fig. 7D) and GL3 expression was clearly induced (Fig. 5). However, TT8 expression was only induced markedly by BAP, and not by JA or GA3, suggesting that marginal trichome formation in the gl3 mutant might not be restored by the simple transcriptional up-regulation of TT8 expression (Supplemental Fig. S3B). Therefore, we visualized promoter activities and spatial expression of trichome developmental genes by histochemical analysis of transgenic plants with promoter-GUS fusions in the absence or presence of the three phytohormones. The GUS activity patterns in all promoter-GUS lines tested were affected markedly by the phytohormones (Fig. 8 ). The effects observed were all consistent with the qPCR data (Fig. 5; Supplemental Fig. S3B). In the ProGL3:GUS line, the strongest GUS staining was detected at the leaf margins and further increased after phytohormonal treatment without substantial alteration of the overall spatial expression pattern; hence, it was in agreement with the above-described role of GL3 in marginal trichome initiation. In contrast, the expression pattern of ProEGL3:GUS was also strongly pronounced in the lower half of the leaf lamina in addition to the leaf margin. This activity was further enhanced by JA and BAP but not by GA3.
In mock-treated ProTT8:GUS plants, we could not detect TT8 promoter activity in leaf margins but we detected a weak blue staining in the lamina. JA and BAP clearly induced promoter activity in the leaf lamina, whereas GA3 treatment reduced GUS staining dramatically. Intriguingly, even in the presence of JA and BAP, the TT8 promoter activity remained lower in the leaf margin than in the lamina. Notably, the ProTT8:GUS expression pattern was clearly affected by the absence of TTG1. In contrast to the situation in the wild-type background, ProTT8:GUS staining could not be detected anymore in ttg1 mutant leaves under mock conditions. Furthermore, ProTT8:GUS staining was now visible at the margins of ttg1 leaves after treatment with JA and BAP (Fig. 8), which is consistent with the restoration of marginal trichome initiation in this mutant background (Fig. 6). We did not notice any differences in the spatial expression of ProTT8:GUS in the gl3egl3 mutant background when compared with that of the wild type (data not shown), indicating that in leaves, TT8 expression is not regulated by GL3 or EGL3. Our findings indicate that for each of the three trichome-regulating bHLH factors, spatial gene expression is divergent in leaf margin and lamina, depends on the presence of phytohormones and of TTG1, and is in accordance with the respective functions in trichome initiation.
Multiple genetic and environmental factors affect trichome density, a trait that is of great ecological importance for many plants, in particular in defense against herbivores (Traw and Bergelson, 2003
Using a robust trichome-promoting experimental setup, we showed that exogenous application of the phytohormones GA3, JA, and BAP all stimulated trichome formation in a seemingly similar way when scored merely by leaf trichome numbers and density. However, despite this common effect, the three hormones have strikingly distinct or even antagonistic effects on various other cellular and developmental processes. For instance, cytokinins stimulated leaf cell division and blocked pavement cell maturation, whereas GAs promoted the latter event. In spite of their positive effect on trichome initiation, cytokinins clearly blocked trichome maturation, whereas JAs promoted it. Thus, different cell types can adjust their response to a particular hormone to the context of the developmental programs they are committed to. This finding is in agreement with recent observations that cytokinin functions seem to be diverse and context dependent and that different cytokinin threshold levels are required for cell proliferation, elongation, and differentiation (Müller and Sheen, 2007
In general, our observations correspond well with the established physiological roles of GAs, cytokinins, and JAs in plant development and defense. GAs promote the juvenile-to-adult growth transition, and this vegetative phase change influences trichome production (Telfer et al., 1997
Arabidopsis trichome formation depends on the activity of the TTG1 transcriptional activator/repressor complex, in which the bHLH proteins are postulated to share largely overlapping functions and the MYB proteins to provide the specificity for the downstream effects. However, hitherto, functional redundancy between the bHLH proteins TT8, GL3, and EGL3 was suggested to be incomplete, because TT8 was presumably involved only in seed coat mucilage production and in phenylpropanoid biosynthesis in leaves and seeds (Zhang et al., 2003
Crucial factors in the control of TTG1-dependent pathways are the existence of autoregulatory loops and the degree of overlap in expression of MYB- and bHLH-encoding genes. For instance, GL3 is recruited to its own promoter with a decreased GL3 expression as a result, implying the presence of a GL3-negative autoregulatory loop (Morohashi et al., 2007
Plant Material and Maintenance Mutant and wild-type Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) seeds were incubated on Murashige and Skoog germination medium on horizontally oriented square plates (Greiner Labortechnik). After the first four leaves had been formed, seedlings were transferred to Murashige and Skoog medium without (K1) or with 5 µM JA (Sigma-Aldrich), 1 µM GA3 (Sigma-Aldrich), or 1 µM BAP (Sigma-Aldrich). Plants were grown under continuous light (110 µE m–2 s–1 photosynthetically active radiation supplied by cool-white fluorescent tungsten tubes [Osram]) at 22°C.
For microscopy, leaves were harvested, cleared overnight in methanol, and subsequently stored in lactic acid (90%). Total leaf area was determined with the public domain image-analysis program ImageJ (version 1.37; http://rsb.info.nih.gov/ij/) from digitized images taken with a CCD camera installed on a binocular (Stemi SV11; Zeiss). To measure cell density, leaves were mounted on a slide and observed with a microscope fitted with differential interference contrast optics (Leica). Epidermal cell number and area were determined with ImageJ from scanned drawing-tube images of outlines of at least 100 cells of the abaxial epidermis located 25% and 75% from the distance between the tip and the base of the leaf and halfway between the midrib and the leaf margin. The following parameters were obtained with ImageJ: the areas of all individual cells in the drawing, the total number of cells, and the number of guard cells. From these data, we calculated the average cell area and estimated the total number of cells per leaf by dividing the leaf area by the average cell area (averaged between the apical and basal positions). Finally, the number of trichomes per whole leaf was counted.
GUS activity was assayed by immersing seedlings in a staining solution consisting of 50 mM sodium phosphate buffer (pH 7.0), 0.1% Triton X-100, 10 µL mL–1 dimethylformamide, and 0.5 mg mL–1 5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl glucuronide at 37°. To limit the diffusion of the blue staining, 5 mM K3Fe(CN)6 and 5 mM K4Fe(CN)6 were added. After staining for 24 h, tissues were cleared in absolute ethanol for 1 h and in 70% ethanol for 2 h to remove the chlorophyll. Seedlings were mounted in lactic acid (90%) and visualized on a binocular (Stemi SV11; Zeiss).
Leaf blades from three plants were pooled and chopped with a razor blade in 300 µL of 45 mM MgCl2, 30 mM sodium citrate, 20 mM MOPS (pH 7.0), and 1% Triton X-100 (Galbraith et al., 1991
Leaves were fixed in a solution of three-quarters 95% ethanol and one-quarter glacial acetic acid for 2 h at room temperature and stored in 70% ethanol at 4°C. Fixed tissue was soaked first in water and then in 0.5 M EDTA (pH 8.0). Trichomes from leaves from six plants were removed from the abaxial epidermis with a pair of fine forceps, pooled, and mounted on a glass slide. A drop of DAPI at a concentration of 0.005 mg mL–1 in McIlvaines's buffer (pH 4.1; 60 mL of 0.1 mol L–1 citric acid + 40 mL of 0.2 mol mL–1 Na2HPO4) was put on the isolated trichomes. The trichomes were covered with a drop of Vectashield medium (Vector Laboratories) and observed with a 20x objective and a 40x objective on an Axioskop microscope equipped with an Axiocam CCD camera (Zeiss). Images were obtained with the Axiovision software and analyzed in gray-scale with ImageJ. The nuclear area was manually circumscribed, and the size and fluorescence intensity were determined. The relative DNA content is reflected by the integrated density, which is the product of the area and the average fluorescence (Boudolf et al., 2004
Leaves were harvested and fixed overnight at 4°C in a solution of 4% (v/v) paraformaldehyde, 1% (v/v) glutaraldehyde (25% solution), and 0.02 M sodium phosphate buffer (pH 7.0). After fixation, samples were rinsed three times in sodium phosphate buffer and postfixed in 1% (v/v) OsO4 (in the same buffer) for 2 h. After dehydration through a graded ethanol series (30%, 50%, 70%, 95%, and 100% three times, 15 min for each step), specimens were dried with CO2 by the critical point dryer CPD 030 (Bal-Tec). The samples were coated with a gold layer with a JFC-1200 sputter coater (JEOL), mounted on scanning electron microscope stubs with double-sided sticky carbon tape, and examined with a scanning electron microscope (JSM-5600 LV; JEOL) under an accelerating voltage of 5 kV.
Pigments were extracted by incubating pooled whole seedlings (n = 3) for 48 h at 4°C in acidic (1% HCl [w/v]) methanol. The absorbance of the extracts, clarified by filtration, was measured at 530 nm (absorption peak of anthocyanin) and 657 nm (absorption peak of chlorophyll in acidic methanol) with a Life Science UV/VIS spectrophotometer (Beckman). The formula A530 – 0.33 A657 was used to compensate for the contribution of chlorophyll and its degradation products to the absorption at 530 nm (Mancinelli and Schwartz, 1984
RNA was extracted with Plant Reagent (Invitrogen) from pooled leaves of 20 plants. Poly(dT) cDNA was prepared from 1 µg of total RNA with SuperScriptII reverse transcriptase (Invitrogen) and quantified on an iCycler apparatus (Bio-Rad) with the qPCR core kit for SYBR Green I (Eurogentec). PCR was carried out on 96-well optical reaction plates heated for 10 min at 95°C to activate hot-start Taq DNA polymerase, followed by 50 cycles of denaturation for 60 s at 95°C and annealing extension for 60 s at 58°C. Targets were quantified with specific primer pairs designed with the Beacon Designer 4.0 (Premier Biosoft International) or Probe library (http://www.probelibrary.com/). All PCRs were done in triplicate. Expression levels were normalized to those of the ACTIN2 control gene.
The following materials are available in the online version of this article.
We thank John Larkin for providing the ProGL1:GUS line and the ttg1, gl3egl3, and gl1 mutants; Alan Lloyd for the ProGL2:GUS, ProGL3:GUS, and ProEGL3:GUS lines; Martin Hülskamp for the gl1myb23 mutant; Loïc Lepiniec for the ProTT8:GUS line and the tt8 and gl3egl3tt8 mutants; Renaat Dasseville for excellent technical microscope assistance; Gerrit Beemster and Tom Beeckman for helpful discussion and critical reading of the manuscript; and Martine De Cock for help in preparing it. Received June 26, 2008; accepted September 7, 2008; published September 10, 2008.
1 This work was supported by grants from Ghent University (project no. VARL9104) and the Vlaamse Interuniversitaire Raad (grant no. VLADOC–B/09269/02). The author responsible for distribution of materials integral to the findings presented in this article in accordance with the policy described in the Instructions for Authors (www.plantphysiol.org) is: Alain Goossens (algoo{at}psb.ugent.be).
[W] The online version of this article contains Web-only data. www.plantphysiol.org/cgi/doi/10.1104/pp.108.125385 * Corresponding author; e-mail algoo{at}psb.ugent.be.
Barth S, Melchinger AE, Lübberstedt T (2002) Genetic diversity in Arabidopsis thaliana L. Heynh. investigated by cleaved amplified polymorphic sequence (CAPS) and inter-simple sequence repeat (ISSR) markers. Mol Ecol 11: 495–505[CrossRef][Medline] Baudry A, Caboche M, Lepiniec L (2006) TT8 controls its own expression in a feedback regulation involving TTG1 and homologous MYB and bHLH factors, allowing a strong and cell-specific accumulation of flavonoids in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant J 46: 768–779[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Baudry A, Heim MA, Dubreucq B, Caboche M, Weisshaar B, Lepiniec L (2004) TT2, TT8, and TTG1 synergistically specify the expression of BANYULS and proanthocyanidin biosynthesis in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant J 39: 366–380[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Borevitz JO, Xia Y, Blount J, Dixon RA, Lamb C (2000) Activation tagging identifies a conserved MYB regulator of phenylpropanoid biosynthesis. Plant Cell 12: 2383–2393 Boudolf V, Barrôco R, de Almeida Engler J, Verkest A, Beeckman T, Naudts M, Inzé D, De Veylder L (2004) B1-type cyclin-dependent kinases are essential for the formation of stomatal complexes in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Cell 16: 945–955 Broun P (2005) Transcriptional control of flavonoid biosynthesis: a complex network of conserved regulators involved in multiple aspects of differentiation in Arabidopsis. Curr Opin Plant Biol 8: 272–279[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Chien JC, Sussex IM (1996) Differential regulation of trichome formation on the adaxial and abaxial leaf surfaces by gibberellins and photoperiod in Arabidopsis thaliana (L.) Heynh. Plant Physiol 111: 1321–1328[Abstract] Dong CH, Xia GX, Hong Y, Ramachandran S, Kost B, Chua NH (2001) ADF proteins are involved in the control of flowering and regulate F-actin organization, cell expansion, and organ growth in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 13: 1333–1346 Dubos C, Le Gourrierec J, Baudry A, Huep G, Lanet E, Debeaujon I, Routaboul JM, Alboresi A, Weisshaar B, Lepiniec L (2008) MYBL2 is a new regulator of flavonoid biosynthesis in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant J 55: 940–953[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Esch JJ, Chen M, Sanders M, Hillestad M, Ndkium S, Idelkope B, Neizer J, Marks MD (2003) A contradictory GLABRA3 allele helps define gene interactions controlling trichome development in Arabidopsis. Development 130: 5885–5894 Esch JJ, Chen MA, Hillestad M, Marks MD (2004) Comparison of TRY and the closely related At1g01380 gene in controlling Arabidopsis trichome patterning. Plant J 40: 860–869[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Galbraith DW, Harkins KR, Knapp S (1991) Systemic endopolyploidy in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Physiol 96: 985–989 Gan Y, Kumimoto R, Liu C, Ratcliffe O, Yu H, Broun P (2006) GLABROUS INFLORESCENCE STEMS modulates the regulation by gibberellins of epidermal differentiation and shoot maturation in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 18: 1383–1395 Gan Y, Liu C, Yu H, Broun P (2007) Integration of cytokinin and gibberellin signalling by Arabidopsis transcription factors GIS, ZFP8, and GIS2 in the regulation of epidermal cell fate. Development 134: 2073–2081 Gonzalez A, Zhao M, Leavitt JM, Lloyd AM (2008) Regulation of the anthocyanin biosynthetic pathway by the TTG1/bHLH/Myb transcriptional complex in Arabidopsis seedlings. Plant J 53: 814–827[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Greenboim-Wainberg Y, Maymon I, Borochov R, Alvarez J, Olszewski N, Ori N, Eshed Y, Weiss D (2005) Cross talk between gibberellin and cytokinin: the Arabidopsis GA response inhibitor SPINDLY plays a positive role in cytokinin signaling. Plant Cell 17: 92–102 Heim MA, Jakoby M, Werber M, Martin C, Weisshaar B, Bailey PC (2003) The basic helix-loop-helix transcription factor family in plants: a genome-wide study of protein structure and functional diversity. Mol Biol Evol 20: 735–747 Hülskamp M, Miséra S, Jürgens G (1994) Genetic dissection of trichome cell development in Arabidopsis. Cell 76: 555–566[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Hülskamp M, Schnittger A (1998) Spatial regulation of trichome formation in Arabidopsis thaliana. Semin Cell Dev Biol 9: 213–220[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Hülskamp M, Schnittger A, Folkers U (1999) Pattern formation and cell differentiation: trichomes in Arabidopsis as a genetic model system. Int Rev Cytol 186: 147–178[Web of Science][Medline] Kirik V, Lee MM, Wester K, Herrmann U, Zheng Z, Oppenheimer D, Schiefelbein J, Hülskamp M (2005) Functional diversification of MYB23 and GL1 genes in trichome morphogenesis and initiation. Development 132: 1477–1485 Kirik V, Schnittger A, Radchuk V, Adler K, Hülskamp M, Bäumlein H (2001) Ectopic expression of the Arabidopsis AtMYB23 gene induces differentiation of trichome cells. Dev Biol 235: 366–377[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Kirik V, Simon M, Hülskamp M, Schiefelbein J (2004a) The ENHANCER OF TRY AND CPC1 gene acts redundantly with TRIPTYCHON and CAPRICE in trichome and root hair cell patterning in Arabidopsis. Dev Biol 268: 506–513[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Kirik V, Simon M, Wester K, Schiefelbein J, Hülskamp M (2004b) ENHANCER of TRY and CPC 2 (ETC2) reveals redundancy in the region-specific control of trichome development of Arabidopsis. Plant Mol Biol 55: 389–398[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Larkin JC, Brown ML, Schiefelbein J (2003) How do cells know what they want to be when they grow up? Lessons from epidermal patterning in Arabidopsis. Annu Rev Plant Biol 54: 403–430[CrossRef][Medline] Larkin JC, Marks MD, Nadeau J, Sack F (1997) Epidermal cell fate and patterning in leaves. Plant Cell 9: 1109–1120[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Larkin JC, Young N, Prigge M, Marks MD (1996) The control of trichome spacing and number in Arabidopsis. Development 122: 997–1005[Abstract] Mancinelli AL, Schwartz OM (1984) The photoregulation of anthocyanin synthesis. IX. The photosensitivity of the response in dark and light-grown tomato seedlings. Plant Cell Physiol 25: 93–105 Marks MD (1997) Molecular genetic analysis of trichome development in Arabidopsis. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 48: 137–163[CrossRef][Web of Science] Matsui K, Umemura Y, Ohme-Takagi M (2008) AtMYBL2, a protein with a single MYB domain, acts as a negative regulator of anthocyanin biosynthesis in Arabidopsis. Plant J 55: 954–967[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Mauricio R (2005) Ontogenetics of QTL: the genetic architecture of trichome density over time in Arabidopsis thaliana. Genetica 123: 75–85[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Melaragno JE, Mehrotra B, Coleman AW (1993) Relationship between endopolyploidy and cell size in epidermal tissue of Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 5: 1661–1668[Abstract] Morohashi K, Zhao M, Yang M, Read B, Lloyd A, Lamb R, Grotewold E (2007) Participation of the Arabidopsis bHLH factor GL3 in trichome initiation regulatory events. Plant Physiol 145: 736–746 Müller B, Sheen J (2007) Advances in cytokinin signaling. Science 318: 68–69 Nesi N, Debeaujon I, Jond C, Pelletier G, Caboche M, Lepiniec L (2000) The TT8 gene encodes a basic helix-loop-helix domain protein required for expression of DFR and BAN genes in Arabidopsis siliques. Plant Cell 12: 1863–1878 Oppenheimer DG, Herman PL, Sivakumaran S, Esch J, Marks MD (1991) A myb gene required for leaf trichome differentiation in Arabidopsis is expressed in stipules. Cell 67: 483–493[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Payne CT, Zhang F, Lloyd AM (2000) GL3 encodes a bHLH protein that regulates trichome development in Arabidopsis through interaction with GL1 and TTG1. Genetics 156: 1349–1362 Perazza D, Vachon G, Herzog M (1998) Gibberellins promote trichome formation by up-regulating GLABROUS1 in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol 117: 375–383 Pesch M, Hülskamp M (2004) Creating a two-dimensional pattern de novo during Arabidopsis trichome and root hair initiation. Curr Opin Genet Dev 14: 422–427[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Rerie WG, Feldmann KA, Marks MD (1994) The GLABRA2 gene encodes a homeo domain protein required for normal trichome development in Arabidopsis. Genes Dev 8: 1388–1399 Riou-Khamlichi C, Huntley R, Jacqmard A, Murray JAH (1999) Cytokinin activation of Arabidopsis cell division through a D-type cyclin. Science 283: 1541–1544 Schellmann S, Hülskamp M, Uhrig J (2007) Epidermal pattern formation in the root and shoot of Arabidopsis. Biochem Soc Trans 35: 146–148[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Schellmann S, Schnittger A, Kirik V, Wada T, Okada K, Beermann A, Thumfahrt J, Jürgens G, Hülskamp M (2002) TRIPTYCHON and CAPRICE mediate lateral inhibition during trichome and root hair patterning in Arabidopsis. EMBO J 21: 5036–5046[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Schnittger A, Folkers U, Schwab B, Jürgens G, Hülskamp M (1999) Generation of spacing pattern: the role of TRIPTYCHON in trichomes patterning in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 11: 1105–1116 Schnittger A, Jürgens G, Hülskamp M (1998) Tissue layer and organ specificity of trichome formation are regulated by GLABRA1 and TRIPTYCHON in Arabidopsis. Development 125: 2283–2289[Abstract] Serna L, Martin C (2006) Trichomes: different regulatory networks lead to convergent structures. Trends Plant Sci 11: 274–280[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] Szymanski DB, Marks MD (1998) GLABROUS1 overexpression and TRIPTYCHON alter the cell cycle and trichome cell fate in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 10: 2047–2062 Szymanski DB, Marks MD, Wick SM (1999) Organized F-actin is essential for normal trichome morphogenesis in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 11: 2331–2347 Telfer A, Bollman KM, Poethig RS (1997) Phase change and the regulation of trichome distribution in Arabidopsis thaliana. Development 124: 645–654[Abstract] Tominaga R, Iwata M, Sano R, Inoue K, Okada K, Wada T (2008) Arabidopsis CAPRICE-LIKE MYB 3 (CPL3) controls endoreduplication and flowering development in addition to trichome and root hair formation. Development 135: 1335–1345 Traw MB, Bergelson J (2003) Interactive effects of jasmonic acid, salicylic acid, and gibberellin on induction of trichomes in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol 133: 1367–1375 Wada T, Tachibana T, Shimura Y, Okada K (1997) Epidermal cell differentiation in Arabidopsis determined by a Myb homolog, CPC. Science 277: 1113–1116 Walker AR, Davison PA, Bolognesi-Winfield AC, James CM, Srinivasan N, Blundell TL, Esch JJ, Marks MD, Gray JC (1999) The TRANSPARENT TESTA GLABRA1 locus, which regulates trichome differentiation and anthocyanin biosynthesis in Arabidopsis, encodes a WD40 repeat protein. Plant Cell 11: 1337–1349 Zhang F, Gonzalez A, Zhao M, Payne CT, Lloyd A (2003) A network of redundant bHLH proteins functions in all TTG1-dependent pathways of Arabidopsis. Development 130: 4859–4869 Zimmermann IM, Heim MA, Weisshaar B, Uhrig JF (2004) Comprehensive identification of Arabidopsis thaliana MYB transcription factors interacting with R/B-like BHLH proteins. Plant J 40: 22–34[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] This article has been cited by other articles:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ASPB Publications | PLANT PHYSIOLOGY® | THE PLANT CELL | |
|---|---|---|---|