Chromatin-Dependent Repression of the Arabidopsis Floral Integrator Genes Involves Plant Specific PHD-Containing Proteins

The interplay among histone modifications modulates the expression of master regulatory genes in development. Chromatin effector proteins bind histone modifications and translate the epigenetic status into gene expression patterns that control development. Here, we show that two Arabidopsis thaliana paralogs encoding plant-specific proteins with a plant homeodomain (PHD) motif, SHORT LIFE (SHL) and EARLY BOLTING IN SHORT DAYS (EBS), function in the chromatin-mediated repression of floral initiation and play independent roles in the control of genes regulating flowering. Previous results showed that repression of the floral integrator FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT) requires EBS. We establish that SHL is necessary to negatively regulate the expression of SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION OF CO1 (SOC1), another floral integrator. SHL and EBS recognize di- and trimethylated histone H3 at lysine 4 and bind regulatory regions of SOC1 and FT, respectively. These PHD proteins maintain an inactive chromatin conformation in SOC1 and FT by preventing high levels of H3 acetylation, bind HISTONE DEACETYLASE6, and play a central role in regulating flowering time. SHL and EBS are widely conserved in plants but are absent in other eukaryotes, suggesting that the regulatory module mediated by these proteins could represent a distinct mechanism for gene expression control in plants.     

Integration of photoperiod and cold temperature signals into flowering genetic pathways in Arabidopsis

Appropriate timing of flowering is critical for propagation and reproductive success in plants. Therefore, flowering time is coordinately regulated by endogenous developmental programs and external signals, such as changes in photoperiod and temperature. Flowering is delayed by a transient shift to cold temperatures that frequently occurs during early spring in the temperate zones. It is known that the delayed flowering by short-term cold stress is mediated primarily by the floral repressor FLOWERING LOCUS C (FLC). However, how the FLC-mediated cold signals are integrated into flowering genetic pathways is not fully understood. We have recently reported that the INDUCER OF CBF EXPRESSION 1 (ICE1), which is a master regulator of cold responses, FLC, and the floral integrator SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION OF CONSTANS 1 (SOC1) constitute an elaborated feedforward-feedback loop that integrates photoperiod and cold temperature signals to regulate seasonal flowering in Arabidopsis. Cold temperatures promote the binding of ICE1 to FLC promoter to induce its expression, resulting in delayed flowering. However, under floral inductive conditions, SOC1 induces flowering by blocking the ICE1 activity. We propose that the ICE1-FLC-SOC1 signaling network fine-tunes the timing of photoperiodic flowering during changing seasons.     

Stress and salicylic acid induce the expression of PnFT2 in the regulation of the stress-induced flowering of Pharbitis nil

Poor nutrition and low temperature stress treatments induced flowering in the Japanese morning glory Pharbitis nil (synonym Ipomoea nil) cv. Violet. The expression of PnFT2, one of two homologs of the floral pathway integrator gene FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT), was induced by stress, whereas the expression of both PnFT1 and PnFT2 was induced by a short-day treatment. There was no positive correlation between the flowering response and the homolog expression of another floral pathway integrator gene SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION OF CO1 and genes upstream of PnFT, such as CONSTANS. In another cultivar, Tendan, flowering and PnFT2 expression were not induced by poor nutrition stress. Aminooxyacetic acid (AOA), a phenylalanine ammonia-lyase inhibitor, inhibited the flowering and PnFT2 expression induced by poor nutrition stress in Violet. Salicylic acid (SA) eliminated the inhibitory effects of AOA. SA enhanced PnFT2 expression under the poor nutrition stress but not under non-stress conditions. These results suggest that SA induces PnFT2 expression, which in turn induces flowering; SA on its own, however, may not be sufficient for induction.     

The E3 Ubiquitin Ligase HOS1 Regulates Arabidopsis Flowering by Mediating CONSTANS Degradation Under Cold Stress

The timing of flowering is coordinated by a web of gene regulatory networks that integrates developmental and environmental cues in plants. Light and temperature are two major environmental determinants that regulate flowering time. Although prolonged treatment with low nonfreezing temperatures accelerates flowering by stable repression of FLOWERING LOCUS C (FLC), repeated brief cold treatments delay flowering. Here, we report that intermittent cold treatments trigger the degradation of CONSTANS (CO), a central activator of photoperiodic flowering; daily treatments caused suppression of the floral integrator FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT) and delayed flowering. Cold-induced CO degradation is mediated via a ubiquitin/proteasome pathway that involves the E3 ubiquitin ligase HIGH EXPRESSION OF OSMOTICALLY RESPONSIVE GENE 1 (HOS1). HOS1-mediated CO degradation occurs independently of the well established cold response pathways. It is also independent of the light signaling repressor CONSTITUTIVE PHOTOMORPHOGENIC 1 (COP1) E3 ligase and light wavelengths. CO has been shown to play a key role in photoperiodic flowering. Here, we demonstrated that CO served as a molecular hub, integrating photoperiodic and cold stress signals into the flowering genetic pathways. We propose that the HOS1-CO module contributes to the fine-tuning of photoperiodic flowering under short term temperature fluctuations, which often occur during local weather disturbances.     

Brahma is required for proper expression of the floral repressor FLC in Arabidopsis

Background

BRAHMA (BRM) is a member of a family of ATPases of the SWI/SNF chromatin remodeling complexes from Arabidopsis. BRM has been previously shown to be crucial for vegetative and reproductive development.

Methodology/Principal Findings

Here we carry out a detailed analysis of the flowering phenotype of brm mutant plants which reveals that, in addition to repressing the flowering promoting genes CONSTANS (CO), FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT) and SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION OF CO1 (SOC1), BRM also represses expression of the general flowering repressor FLOWERING LOCUS C (FLC). Thus, in brm mutant plants FLC expression is elevated, and FLC chromatin exhibits increased levels of histone H3 lysine 4 tri-methylation and decreased levels of H3 lysine 27 tri-methylation, indicating that BRM imposes a repressive chromatin configuration at the FLC locus. However, brm mutants display a normal vernalization response, indicating that BRM is not involved in vernalization-mediated FLC repression. Analysis of double mutants suggests that BRM is partially redundant with the autonomous pathway. Analysis of genetic interactions between BRM and the histone H2A.Z deposition machinery demonstrates that brm mutations overcome a requirement of H2A.Z for FLC activation suggesting that in the absence of BRM, a constitutively open chromatin conformation renders H2A.Z dispensable.

Conclusions/Significance

BRM is critical for phase transition in Arabidopsis. Thus, BRM represses expression of the flowering promoting genes CO, FT and SOC1 and of the flowering repressor FLC. Our results indicate that BRM controls expression of FLC by creating a repressive chromatin configuration of the locus.     

Cytokinin promotes flowering of Arabidopsis via transcriptional activation of the FT paralogue TSF

Cytokinins are involved in many aspects of plant growth and development, and physiological evidence also indicates that they have a role in floral transition. In order to integrate these phytohormones into the current knowledge of genetically defined molecular pathways to flowering, we performed exogenous treatments of adult wild type and mutant Arabidopsis plants, and analysed the expression of candidate genes. We used a hydroponic system that enables synchronous growth and flowering of Arabidopsis, and allows the precise application of chemicals to the roots for defined periods of time. We show that the application of N⁶‐benzylaminopurine (BAP) promotes flowering of plants grown in non‐inductive short days. The response to cytokinin treatment does not require FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT), but activates its paralogue TWIN SISTER OF FT (TSF), as well as FD, which encodes a partner protein of TSF, and the downstream gene SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION OF CONSTANS 1 (SOC1). Treatment of selected mutants confirmed that TSF and SOC1 are necessary for the flowering response to BAP, whereas the activation cascade might partially act independently of FD. These experiments provide a mechanistic basis for the role of cytokinins in flowering, and demonstrate that the redundant genes FT and TSF are differently regulated by distinct floral‐inducing signals.     

The MADS-Domain Factors AGAMOUS-LIKE15 and AGAMOUS-LIKE18, along with SHORT VEGETATIVE PHASE and AGAMOUS-LIKE24, Are Necessary to Block Floral Gene Expression during the Vegetative Phase

Multiple factors, including the MADS-domain proteins AGAMOUS-LIKE15 (AGL15) and AGL18, contribute to the regulation of the transition from vegetative to reproductive growth. AGL15 and AGL18 were previously shown to act redundantly as floral repressors and upstream of FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT) in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana). A series of genetic and molecular experiments, primarily focused on AGL15, was performed to more clearly define their role. agl15 agl18 mutations fail to suppress ft mutations but show additive interactions with short vegetative phase (svp) mutations in ft and suppressor of constans1 (soc1) backgrounds. Chromatin immunoprecipitation analyses with AGL15-specific antibodies indicate that AGL15 binds directly to the FT locus at sites that partially overlap those bound by SVP and FLOWERING LOCUS C. In addition, expression of AGL15 in the phloem effectively restores wild-type flowering times in agl15 agl18 mutants. When agl15 agl18 mutations are combined with agl24 svp mutations, the plants show upward curling of rosette and cauline leaves, in addition to early flowering. The change in leaf morphology is associated with elevated levels of FT and ectopic expression of SEPALLATA3 (SEP3), leading to ectopic expression of floral genes. Leaf curling is suppressed by sep3 and ft mutations and enhanced by soc1 mutations. Thus, AGL15 and AGL18, along with SVP and AGL24, are necessary to block initiation of floral programs in vegetative organs.Appropriate timing of the shift from vegetative to reproductive growth is an important determinant of plant fitness. The time at which a plant flowers is determined through integration of signals reflecting extrinsic and intrinsic conditions, such as photoperiod, the duration of cold, plant health, and age (for review, see Amasino, 2010). One of the most important pathways regulating the timing of the floral transition is the photoperiod pathway (for review, see Imaizumi and Kay, 2006). Under long-day (LD) inductive conditions in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), photoperiod pathway components act to promote flowering by inducing CONSTANS (CO) and downstream genes. The floral integrator FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT) is a major target of multiple flowering pathways and the photoperiod pathway in particular. It is directly activated by CO (Samach et al., 2000). Under LD conditions, the peak of CO expression is coincident with the presence of light, and CO activates FT expression in the leaf vascular system (Yanovsky and Kay, 2003). FT travels through the phloem to the shoot apex (Corbesier et al., 2007), where, together with FLOWERING LOCUS D (Abe et al., 2005; Wigge et al., 2005), it activates APETALA1 (AP1) and other floral meristem identity genes, starting the flowering process. Other flowering time pathways converge on FT and/or directly impact gene expression in the meristem. The changes in gene expression that accompany the floral transition must be rapid, robust, largely irreversible, and strictly controlled spatially. This is achieved through positive feed-forward and negative feedback loops involving multiple regulatory factors (for recent review, see Kaufmann et al., 2010).Members of the MADS-box family of regulatory factors are central players in the regulatory loops controlling the floral transition (for a recent review, see Smaczniak et al., 2012a). MADS-domain factors typically act in large multimeric complexes and are well suited for regulation that involves combinatorial action. During the floral transition, MADS-domain proteins can act either as repressors or activators. In Arabidopsis, important floral repressors include SHORT VEGETATIVE PHASE (SVP) and members of the FLOWERING LOCUS C (FLC)-like group, including FLC, FLOWERING LOCUS M (FLM)/MADS AFFECTING FLOWERING1 (MAF1), and MAF2 to MAF5. Promoters of flowering include such MADS-domain factors as SUPPRESSOR OF CONSTANS1 (SOC1) and AGAMOUS-LIKE24 (AGL24). Together with non-MADS-box proteins FT and TWIN SISTER OF FT, SOC1 and AGL24 function as floral integrators. These operate downstream of the flowering time pathways but upstream of the meristem identity regulators such as LEAFY (LFY) and the MADS-domain factor AP1.The MADS-domain factors AGL15 and AGL18 also contribute to regulation of the floral transition in Arabidopsis. While single mutants have no phenotype, agl15 agl18 double mutants flower earlier than the wild type (Adamczyk et al., 2007). Therefore, AGL15 and AGL18 appear to act in a redundant fashion in seedlings, and like SVP, FLC, and MAF1 to MAF5, they act as floral repressors. The contributions of AGL15 and AGL18 are most apparent in the absence of strong photoperiodic induction: the agl15 agl18 double mutant combination partially suppresses the delay in flowering observed in co mutants, as well as the flowering delay associated with growth under short-day (SD) noninductive conditions. The earlier flowering in agl15 agl18 mutants under these conditions is associated with up-regulation of FT, and both AGL15 and AGL18 are expressed in the vascular system and shoot apex of young seedlings (Adamczyk et al., 2007), raising the possibility that AGL15 and AGL18 act directly on FT in leaves, as well as other targets in the meristem.AGL15, and to a lesser extent AGL18, have been further implicated in the networks that control flowering through molecular studies. Zheng et al. (2009) performed a chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) analysis using AGL15-specific antibodies, tissue derived from embryo cultures, and a tiling array. Floral repressors (SVP and FLC), floral integrators (FT and SOC1), and a microRNA targeting AP2-like factors (miR172a) were identified as possible AGL15 targets (Zheng et al., 2009), suggesting that AGL15 may contribute to regulation through multiple avenues during the floral transition. AGL15 itself is directly bound and activated by AP2, which is both an A-class floral identity gene and a floral repressor (Yant et al., 2010). AGL15 is down-regulated in ap2 mutants, which are early flowering, while AGL18 is the nearest locus to multiple AP2-bound sites (Yant et al., 2010). Both AGL15 and AGL18 were identified as SOC1 targets through ChIP analyses (Immink et al., 2009; Tao et al., 2012). In yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) two-hybrid assays, AGL15 interacts with a number of other MADS-domain proteins (de Folter et al., 2005), and in a one-hybrid study based on the SOC1 promoter, AGL15-SVP, AGL15-AGL24, and AGL15-SOC1 heterodimers were shown to bind to regions containing CArG boxes (Immink et al., 2012). AGL18 may act redundantly to AGL15 in these contexts. However, AGL18 either does not interact or only interacts weakly with other proteins in yeast two-hybrid assays (de Folter et al., 2005; Hill et al., 2008; Causier et al., 2012). It remains to be determined whether this truly reflects weaker or nonredundant in planta interactions or a technical problem in the artificial yeast system.Guided by the knowledge gained about AGL15 targets and interactions from molecular studies, we asked the following question: what is the functional significance of these molecular relationships in the context of the floral transition? We performed a series of genetic experiments combining agl15 agl18 mutations and mutations in interacting factors such as SVP, AGL24, and SOC1, as well as targets such as FT and SOC1. We also performed further molecular experiments focused on AGL15, for which a variety of tools are available. Among other things, we show that AGL15 and AGL18, along with AGL24 and SVP, play a role in blocking expression of the floral MADS-domain factor SEPALLATA3 (SEP3) during the vegetative phase. In the absence of these four factors, reproductive programs are initiated early, and floral genes are expressed in the youngest rosette leaf and cauline leaves.     

Repression of Flowering by the miR172 Target SMZ

A small mobile protein, encoded by the FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT) locus, plays a central role in the control of flowering. FT is regulated positively by CONSTANS (CO), the output of the photoperiod pathway, and negatively by FLC, which integrates the effects of prolonged cold exposure. Here, we reveal the mechanisms of regulation by the microRNA miR172 target SCHLAFMÜTZE (SMZ), a potent repressor of flowering. Whole-genome mapping of SMZ binding sites demonstrates not only direct regulation of FT, but also of many other flowering time regulators acting both upstream and downstream of FT, indicating an important role of miR172 and its targets in fine tuning the flowering response. A role for the miR172/SMZ module as a rheostat in flowering time is further supported by SMZ binding to several other genes encoding miR172 targets. Finally, we show that the action of SMZ is completely dependent on another floral repressor, FLM, providing the first direct connection between two important classes of flowering time regulators, AP2- and MADS-domain proteins.     

The Fragaria vesca Homolog of SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION OF CONSTANS1 Represses Flowering and Promotes Vegetative Growth

In the annual long-day plant Arabidopsis thaliana, SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION OF CONSTANS1 (SOC1) integrates endogenous and environmental signals to promote flowering. We analyzed the function and regulation of the SOC1 homolog (Fragaria vesca [Fv] SOC1) in the perennial short-day plant woodland strawberry (Fragaria vesca). We found that Fv SOC1 overexpression represses flower initiation under inductive short days, whereas its silencing causes continuous flowering in both short days and noninductive long days, similar to mutants in the floral repressor Fv TERMINAL FLOWER1 (Fv TFL1). Molecular analysis of these transgenic lines revealed that Fv SOC1 activates Fv TFL1 in the shoot apex, leading to the repression of flowering in strawberry. In parallel, Fv SOC1 regulates the differentiation of axillary buds to runners or axillary leaf rosettes, probably through the activation of gibberellin biosynthetic genes. We also demonstrated that Fv SOC1 is regulated by photoperiod and Fv FLOWERING LOCUS T1, suggesting that it plays a central role in the photoperiodic control of both generative and vegetative growth in strawberry. In conclusion, we propose that Fv SOC1 is a signaling hub that regulates yearly cycles of vegetative and generative development through separate genetic pathways.     

Dissection of floral induction pathways using global expression analysis

Flowering of the reference plant Arabidopsis thaliana is controlled by several signaling pathways, which converge on a small set of genes that function as pathway integrators. We have analyzed the genomic response to one type of floral inductive signal, photoperiod, to dissect the function of several genes transducing this stimulus, including CONSTANS, thought to be the major output of the photoperiod pathway. Comparing the effects of CONSTANS with those of FLOWERING LOCUS T, which integrates inputs from CONSTANS and other floral inductive pathways, we find that expression profiles of shoot apices from plants with mutations in either gene are very similar. In contrast, a mutation in LEAFY, which also acts downstream of CONSTANS, has much more limited effects. Another pathway integrator, SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION OF CO 1, is responsive to acute induction by photoperiod even in the presence of the floral repressor encoded by FLOWERING LOCUS C. We have discovered a large group of potential floral repressors that are down-regulated upon photoperiodic induction. These include two AP2 domain-encoding genes that can repress flowering. The two paralogous genes, SCHLAFMUTZE and SCHNARCHZAPFEN, share a signature with partial complementarity to the miR172 microRNA, whose precursor we show to be induced upon flowering. These and related findings on SPL genes suggest that microRNAs play an important role in the regulation of flowering.     

Reduction of the geomagnetic field delays Arabidopsis thaliana flowering time through downregulation of flowering‐related genes

Variations in magnetic field (MF) intensity are known to induce plant morphological and gene expression changes. In Arabidopsis thaliana Col‐0, near‐null magnetic field (NNMF, i.e., <100 nT MF) causes a delay in the transition to flowering, but the expression of genes involved in this response has been poorly studied. Here, we showed a time‐course quantitative analysis of the expression of both leaf (including clock genes, photoperiod pathway, GA20ox, SVP, and vernalization pathway) and floral meristem (including GA2ox, SOC1, AGL24, LFY, AP1, FD, and FLC) genes involved in the transition to flowering in A. thaliana under NNMF. NNMF induced a delayed flowering time and a significant reduction of leaf area index and flowering stem length, with respect to controls under geomagnetic field. Generation experiments (F₁‐ and F₂‐NNMF) showed retention of flowering delay. The quantitative expression (qPCR) of some A. thaliana genes expressed in leaves and floral meristem was studied during transition to flowering. In leaves and flowering meristem, NNMF caused an early downregulation of clock, photoperiod, gibberellin, and vernalization pathways and a later downregulation of TSF, AP1, and FLC. In the floral meristem, the downregulation of AP1, AGL24, FT, and FLC in early phases of floral development was accompanied by a downregulation of the gibberellin pathway. The progressive upregulation of AGL24 and AP1 was also correlated to the delayed flowering by NNMF. The flowering delay is associated with the strong downregulation of FT, FLC, and GA20ox in the floral meristem and FT, TSF, FLC, and GA20ox in leaves. Bioelectromagnetics. 39:361–374, 2018. © 2018 The Authors. Bioelectromagnetics Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.