Genetic interactions reveal the antagonistic roles of FT/TSF and TFL1 in the determination of inflorescence meristem identity in Arabidopsis

During the transition to the reproductive phase, the shoot apical meristem switches from the developmental program that generates vegetative organs to instead produce flowers. In this study, we examined the genetic interactions of FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT)/TWIN SISTER OF FT (TSF) and TERMINAL FLOWER 1 (TFL1) in the determination of inflorescence meristem identity in Arabidopsis thaliana. The ft‐10 tsf‐1 mutants produced a compact inflorescence surrounded by serrated leaves (hyper‐vegetative shoot) at the early bolting stage, as did plants overexpressing TFL1. Plants overexpressing FT or TSF (or both FT and TFL1) generated a terminal flower, as did tfl1‐20 mutants. The terminal flower formed in tfl1‐20 mutants converted to a hyper‐vegetative shoot in ft‐10 tsf‐1 mutants. Grafting ft‐10 tsf‐1 or ft‐10 tsf‐1 tfl1‐20 mutant scions to 35S::FT rootstock plants produced a normal inflorescence and a terminal flower in the scion plants, respectively, although both scions showed similar early flowering. Misexpression of FT in the vasculature and in the shoot apex in wild‐type plants generated a normal inflorescence and a terminal flower, respectively. By contrast, in ft‐10 tsf‐1 mutants the vasculature‐specific misexpression of FT converted the hyper‐vegetative shoot to a normal inflorescence, and in the ft‐10 tsf‐1 tfl1‐20 mutants converted the shoot to a terminal flower. TFL1 levels did not affect the inflorescence morphology caused by FT/TSF overexpression at the early bolting stage. Taking these results together, we proposed that FT/TSF and TFL1 play antagonistic roles in the determination of inflorescence meristem identity, and that FT/TSF are more important than TFL1 in this process.     

SHOOT MERISTEMLESS trafficking controls axillary meristem formation,meristem size and organ boundaries in Arabidopsis

The shoot stem cell niche, contained within the shoot apical meristem (SAM) is maintained in Arabidopsis by the homeodomain protein SHOOT MERISTEMLESS (STM). STM is a mobile protein that traffics cell‐to‐cell, presumably through plasmodesmata. In maize, the STM homolog KNOTTED1 shows clear differences between mRNA and protein localization domains in the SAM. However, the STM mRNA and protein localization domains are not obviously different in Arabidopsis, and the functional relevance of STM mobility is unknown. Using a non‐mobile version of STM (2xNLS‐YFP‐STM), we show that STM mobility is required to suppress axillary meristem formation during embryogenesis, to maintain meristem size, and to precisely specify organ boundaries throughout development. STM and organ boundary genes CUP SHAPED COTYLEDON1 (CUC1), CUC2 and CUC3 regulate each other during embryogenesis to establish the embryonic SAM and to specify cotyledon boundaries, and STM controls CUC expression post‐embryonically at organ boundary domains. We show that organ boundary specification by correct spatial expression of CUC genes requires STM mobility in the meristem. Our data suggest that STM mobility is critical for its normal function in shoot stem cell control.     

Flexible functional interactions between G‐protein subunits contribute to the specificity of plant responses

Plants being sessile integrate information from a variety of endogenous and external cues simultaneously to optimize growth and development. This necessitates the signaling networks in plants to be highly dynamic and flexible. One such network involves heterotrimeric G‐proteins comprised of Gα, Gβ, and Gγ subunits, which influence many aspects of growth, development, and stress response pathways. In plants such as Arabidopsis, a relatively simple repertoire of G‐proteins comprised of one canonical and three extra‐large Gα, one Gβ and three Gγ subunits exists. Because the Gβ and Gγ proteins form obligate dimers, the phenotypes of plants lacking the sole Gβ or all Gγ genes are similar, as expected. However, Gα proteins can exist either as monomers or in a complex with Gβγ, and the details of combinatorial genetic and physiological interactions of different Gα proteins with the sole Gβ remain unexplored. To evaluate such flexible, signal‐dependent interactions and their contribution toward eliciting a specific response, we have generated Arabidopsis mutants lacking specific combinations of Gα and Gβ genes, performed extensive phenotypic analysis, and evaluated the results in the context of subunit usage and interaction specificity. Our data show that multiple mechanistic modes, and in some cases complex epistatic relationships, exist depending on the signal‐dependent interactions between the Gα and Gβ proteins. This suggests that, despite their limited numbers, the inherent flexibility of plant G‐protein networks provides for the adaptability needed to survive under continuously changing environments.     

Functional screening of willow alleles in Arabidopsis combined with QTL mapping in willow (Salix) identifies SxMAX4 as a coppicing response gene

Willows (Salix spp.) are important biomass crops due to their ability to grow rapidly with low fertilizer inputs and ease of cultivation in short‐rotation coppice cycles. They are relatively undomesticated and highly diverse, but functional testing to identify useful allelic variation is time‐consuming in trees and transformation is not yet possible in willow. Arabidopsis is heralded as a model plant from which knowledge can be transferred to advance the improvement of less tractable species. Here, knowledge and methodologies from Arabidopsis were successfully used to identify a gene influencing stem number in coppiced willows, a complex trait of key biological and industrial relevance. The strigolactone‐related More AXillary growth (MAX) genes were considered candidates due to their role in shoot branching. We previously demonstrated that willow and Arabidopsis show similar response to strigolactone and that transformation rescue of Arabidopsis max mutants with willow genes could be used to detect allelic differences. Here, this approach was used to screen 45 SxMAX1, SxMAX2, SxMAX3 and SxMAX4 alleles cloned from 15 parents of 11 mapping populations varying in shoot‐branching traits. Single‐nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) frequencies were locus dependent, ranging from 29.2 to 74.3 polymorphic sites per kb. SxMAX alleles were 98%–99% conserved at the amino acid level, but different protein products varying in their ability to rescue Arabidopsis max mutants were identified. One poor rescuing allele, SxMAX4D, segregated in a willow mapping population where its presence was associated with increased shoot resprouting after coppicing and colocated with a QTL for this trait.     

Two inositol hexakisphosphate kinases drive inositol pyrophosphate synthesis in plants

Inositol pyrophosphates are unique cellular signaling molecules with recently discovered roles in energy sensing and metabolism. Studies in eukaryotes have revealed that these compounds have a rapid turnover, and thus only small amounts accumulate. Inositol pyrophosphates have not been the subject of investigation in plants even though seeds produce large amounts of their precursor, myo‐inositol hexakisphosphate (InsP₆). Here, we report that Arabidopsis and maize InsP₆ transporter mutants have elevated levels of inositol pyrophosphates in their seed, providing unequivocal identification of their presence in plant tissues. We also show that plant seeds store a little over 1% of their inositol phosphate pool as InsP₇ and InsP₈. Many tissues, including, seed, seedlings, roots and leaves accumulate InsP₇ and InsP₈, thus synthesis is not confined to tissues with high InsP₆. We have identified two highly similar Arabidopsis genes, AtVip1 and AtVip2, which are orthologous to the yeast and mammalian VIP kinases. Both AtVip1 and AtVip2 encode proteins capable of restoring InsP₇ synthesis in yeast mutants, thus AtVip1 and AtVip2 can function as bonafide InsP₆ kinases. AtVip1 and AtVip2 are differentially expressed in plant tissues, suggesting non‐redundant or non‐overlapping functions in plants. These results contribute to our knowledge of inositol phosphate metabolism and will lay a foundation for understanding the role of InsP₇ and InsP₈ in plants.     

Enhanced resistance to soybean cyst nematode Heterodera glycines in transgenic soybean by silencing putative CLE receptors

CLE peptides are small extracellular proteins important in regulating plant meristematic activity through the CLE‐receptor kinase‐WOX signalling module. Stem cell pools in the SAM (shoot apical meristem), RAM (root apical meristem) and vascular cambium are controlled by CLE signalling pathways. Interestingly, plant‐parasitic cyst nematodes secrete CLE‐like effector proteins, which act as ligand mimics of plant CLE peptides and are required for successful parasitism. Recently, we demonstrated that Arabidopsis CLE receptors CLAVATA1 (CLV1), the CLAVATA2 (CLV2)/CORYNE (CRN) heterodimer receptor complex and RECEPTOR‐LIKE PROTEIN KINASE 2 (RPK2), which transmit the CLV3 signal in the SAM, are required for perception of beet cyst nematode Heterodera schachtii CLEs. Reduction in nematode infection was observed in clv1, clv2, crn, rpk2 and combined double and triple mutants. In an effort to develop nematode resistance in an agriculturally important crop, orthologues of Arabidopsis receptors including CLV1, CLV2, CRN and RPK2 were identified from soybean, a host for the soybean cyst nematode Heterodera glycines. For each of the receptors, there are at least two paralogues in the soybean genome. Localization studies showed that most receptors are expressed in the root, but vary in their level of expression and spatial expression patterns. Expression in nematode‐induced feeding cells was also confirmed. In vitro direct binding of the soybean receptors with the HgCLE peptide was analysed. Knock‐down of the receptors in soybean hairy roots showed enhanced resistance to SCN. Our findings suggest that targeted disruption of nematode CLE signalling may be a potential means to engineer nematode resistance in crop plants.