FTIP1 is an essential regulator required for florigen transport

The capacity to respond to day length, photoperiodism, is crucial for flowering plants to adapt to seasonal change. The photoperiodic control of flowering in plants is mediated by a long-distance mobile floral stimulus called florigen that moves from leaves to the shoot apex. Although the proteins encoded by FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT) in Arabidopsis and its orthologs in other plants are identified as the long-sought florigen, whether their transport is a simple diffusion process or under regulation remains elusive. Here we show that an endoplasmic reticulum (ER) membrane protein, FT-INTERACTING PROTEIN 1 (FTIP1), is an essential regulator required for FT protein transport in Arabidopsis. Loss of function of FTIP1 exhibits late flowering under long days, which is partly due to the compromised FT movement to the shoot apex. FTIP1 and FT share similar mRNA expression patterns and subcellular localization, and they interact specifically in phloem companion cells. FTIP1 is required for FT export from companion cells to sieve elements, thus affecting FT transport through the phloem to the SAM. Our results provide a mechanistic understanding of florigen transport, demonstrating that FT moves in a regulated manner and that FTIP1 mediates FT transport to induce flowering.     

The effect of day length, vernalization and DNA demethylation on the flowering time in Arabidopsis thaliana

We studied the effect of three factors on the induction of flowering in Arabidopsis thaliana , i.e. vernalization, day length and DNA demethylation. Seven natural late flowering genotypes and 13 late flowering mutants were used in the experiments. The effect of the vernalization and the short day (SD) was uniform in all genotypes used, resulting in shortening (vernalization) or extension of the period before the appearance of the first flower primordia. On the other hand, the effect of the demethylating agent (5-azacytidine [5-azaC]) was not uniform in the genotypes used. In all natural late genotypes (except Lu-1 ), the shortening of the flowering time (FT) after 5-azaC treatment was observed. On the contrary, only five mutants – dl , pm , M63 , M73 and fca-1 – showed a shortening of the FT, while in the majority of the late flowering mutants, no significant response (earlier flowering) was found. The different response to the vernalization and demethylation treatment in late flowering mutants shows the possibility of two different pathways leading to the flowering, both of which are regulated by DNA demethylation. The different response of natural and induced late flowering genotypes after 5-azaC treatment shows that genes that play a role in flower development are of a different nature.     

The alleles at the E1 locus impact the expression pattern of two soybean FT-like genes shown to induce flowering in Arabidopsis

A small gene family of phosphatidyl ethanolamine-binding proteins (PEBP) has been shown to function as key regulators in flowering; in Arabidopsis thaliana the FT protein promotes flowering whilst the closely related TFL1 protein represses flowering. Control of flowering time in soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merrill] is important for geographic adaptation and maximizing yield. Soybean breeders have identified a series of loci, the E-genes, that control photoperiod-mediated flowering time, yet how these loci control flowering is poorly understood. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the expression of GmFT-like genes in the E1 near-isogenic line (NIL) background. Of the 20 closely related PEBP proteins in the soybean genome, ten are similar to the Arabidopsis FT protein. Expression analysis of these ten GmFT-like genes confirmed that only two are detectable in the conditions tested. Further analysis of these two genes in the E1 NILs grown under short-day (SD) and long-day (LD) conditions showed a diurnal expression and tissue specificity expression commensurate with soybean flowering time under SD and LD conditions, suggesting that these were good candidates for flowering induction in soybean. Arabidopsis ft mutant lines flowered early when transformed with the two soybean genes, suggesting that the soybean genes can complement the Arabidopsis FT function. Flowering time in E1 NILs is consistent with the differential expression of the two GmFT-like genes under SD and LD conditions, suggesting that the E1 locus, at least in part, impacts time to flowering through the regulation of soybean FT expression.     

Genetic regulation of flowering time and inflorescence architecture by MtFDa and MtFTa1 in Medicago truncatula

Regulation of floral transition and inflorescence development is crucial for plant reproductive success. FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT) is one of the central players in the flowering genetic regulatory network, whereas FLOWERING LOCUS D (FD), an interactor of FT and TERMINAL FLOWER 1 (TFL1), plays significant roles in both floral transition and inflorescence development. Here we show the genetic regulatory networks of floral transition and inflorescence development in Medicago truncatula by characterizing MtFTa1 and MtFDa and their genetic interactions with key inflorescence meristem (IM) regulators. Both MtFTa1 and MtFDa promote flowering; the double mutant mtfda mtfta1 does not proceed to floral transition. RNAseq analysis reveals that a broad range of genes involved in flowering regulation and flower development are up- or downregulated by MtFTa1 and/or MtFDa mutations. Furthermore, mutation of MtFDa also affects the inflorescence architecture. Genetic analyses of MtFDa, MtFTa1, MtTFL1, and MtFULc show that MtFDa is epistatic to MtFULc and MtTFL1 in controlling IM identity. Our results demonstrate that MtFTa1 and MtFDa are major flowering regulators in M. truncatula, and MtFDa is essential both in floral transition and secondary inflorescence development. The study will advance our understanding of the genetic regulation of flowering time and inflorescence development in legumes.

Double mutation of two flowering genes in Medicago truncatula completely blocks the floral transition, resulting in significantly more biomass compared to wild-type.     

Differential expression of genes important for adaptation in Capsella bursa-pastoris (Brassicaceae)

Understanding the genetic basis of natural variation is of primary interest for evolutionary studies of adaptation. In Capsella bursa-pastoris, a close relative of Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), variation in flowering time is correlated with latitude, suggestive of an adaptation to photoperiod. To identify pathways regulating natural flowering time variation in C. bursa-pastoris, we have studied gene expression differences between two pairs of early- and late-flowering C. bursa-pastoris accessions and compared their response to vernalization. Using Arabidopsis microarrays, we found a large number of significant differences in gene expression between flowering ecotypes. The key flowering time gene FLOWERING LOCUS C (FLC) was not differentially expressed prior to vernalization. This result is in contrast to those in Arabidopsis, where most natural flowering time variation acts through FLC. However, the gibberellin and photoperiodic flowering pathways were significantly enriched for gene expression differences between early- and late-flowering C. bursa-pastoris. Gibberellin biosynthesis genes were down-regulated in late-flowering accessions, whereas circadian core genes in the photoperiodic pathway were differentially expressed between early- and late-flowering accessions. Detailed time-series experiments clearly demonstrated that the diurnal rhythm of CIRCADIAN CLOCK-ASSOCIATED1 (CCA1) and TIMING OF CAB EXPRESSION1 (TOC1) expression differed between flowering ecotypes, both under constant light and long-day conditions. Differential expression of flowering time genes was biologically validated in an independent pair of flowering ecotypes, suggesting a shared genetic basis or parallel evolution of similar regulatory differences. We conclude that genes involved in regulation of the circadian clock, such as CCA1 and TOC1, are strong candidates for the evolution of adaptive flowering time variation in C. bursa-pastoris.     

EFO1 and EFO2, encoding putative WD-domain proteins, have overlapping and distinct roles in the regulation of vegetative development and flowering of Arabidopsis

From screening a population of Arabidopsis overexpression lines, two Arabidopsis genes were identified, EFO1 (early flowering by overexpression 1) and EFO2, that confer early flowering when overexpressed. The two genes encode putative WD-domain proteins which share high sequence similarity and constitute a small subfamily. Interestingly, the efo2-1 loss-of-function mutant also flowered earlier in short days and slightly earlier in long days than the wild type, while no flowering-time or morphological differences were observed in efo1-1 relative to the wild type. In addition, the efo2-1 mutation perturbed hypocotyl elongation, leaf expansion and formation, and stem elongation. EFO1 and EFO2 are both regulated by the circadian clock. Expression and genetic analyses revealed that EFO2 suppresses flowering largely through the action of CONSTANS (CO) and flowering locus T (FT), suggesting that EFO2 is a negative regulator of photoperiodic flowering. The growth defects in efo2-1 were augmented in efo1 efo2, but the induction of FT in the double mutant was comparable to that in efo2-1. Thus, while EFO2 acts as a floral repressor, EFO1 may not be directly involved in flowering, but the two genes do have overlapping roles in regulating other developmental processes. EFO1 and EFO2 may function collectively to serve as one of the converging points where the signals of growth and flowering intersect.     

Flowering time regulation produces much fruit

Many of the molecular details regarding the promotion of flowering in response to prolonged exposure to cold temperatures (vernalization) and daylength have recently been elucidated in Arabidopsis. The daylength and vernalization pathway converge in the regulation of floral promoters referred to as floral integrators. In the meristem, vernalization promotes flowering through the epigenetic repression of the floral repressor FLOWERING LOCUS C. This allows for the induction of floral integrators by CONSTANS under inductive long days. In the vasculature of leaves, CONSTANS protein is produced only in long days where it acts to promote the expression of FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT). FT protein is then translocated to the meristem where it acts to promote floral induction. Thus a detailed molecular framework for the regulation of flowering time has now been established in Arabidopsis.     

Epigenetic regulation of flowering

The acceleration of flowering by prolonged low temperature treatment (vernalization) has unique properties including the floral transition occurring at a time separate from the vernalization treatment. This implies the vernalization condition is inherited through mitotic divisions, but this vernalized state is not inherited from one generation to the next. FLC, the key gene mediating this response in the Arabidopsis is repressed by histone modifications involving the VRN2 protein complex. Other protein complexes participate in activating the gene. While many plant species depend on vernalization for optimising flowering time, the genes involved differ between dicot and monocot plants in both Arabidopsis and cereals, vernalization regulates photoperiod control of flowering by preventing the induction of the floral promoter FT by long days in autumn but allowing induction of FT in spring and hence flowering occurs at an optimal time in the annual life cycle.     

Integration of flowering signals in winter-annual Arabidopsis

Photoperiod is the primary environmental factor affecting flowering time in rapid-cycling accessions of Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana). Winter-annual Arabidopsis, in contrast, have both a photoperiod and a vernalization requirement for rapid flowering. In winter annuals, high levels of the floral inhibitor FLC (FLOWERING LOCUS C) suppress flowering prior to vernalization. FLC acts to delay flowering, in part, by suppressing expression of the floral promoter SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION OF CONSTANS1). Vernalization leads to a permanent epigenetic suppression of FLC. To investigate how winter-annual accessions integrate signals from the photoperiod and vernalization pathways, we have examined activation-tagged alleles of FT and the FT homolog, TSF (TWIN SISTER OF FT), in a winter-annual background. Activation of FT or TSF strongly suppresses the FLC-mediated late-flowering phenotype of winter annuals; however, FT and TSF overexpression does not affect FLC mRNA levels. Rather, FT and TSF bypass the block to flowering created by FLC by activating SOC1 expression. We have also found that FLC acts as a dosage-dependent inhibitor of FT expression. Thus, the integration of flowering signals from the photoperiod and vernalization pathways occurs, at least in part, through the regulation of FT, TSF, and SOC1.     

The pea GIGAS gene is a FLOWERING LOCUS T homolog necessary for graft-transmissible specification of flowering but not for responsiveness to photoperiod

Garden pea (Pisum sativum) was prominent in early studies investigating the genetic control of flowering and the role of mobile flowering signals. In view of recent evidence that genes in the FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT) family play an important role in generating mobile flowering signals, we isolated the FT gene family in pea and examined the regulation and function of its members. Comparison with Medicago truncatula and soybean (Glycine max) provides evidence of three ancient subclades (FTa, FTb, and FTc) likely to be common to most crop and model legumes. Pea FT genes show distinctly different expression patterns with respect to developmental timing, tissue specificity, and response to photoperiod and differ in their activity in transgenic Arabidopsis thaliana, suggesting they may have different functions. We show that the pea FTa1 gene corresponds to the GIGAS locus, which is essential for flowering under long-day conditions and promotes flowering under short-day conditions but is not required for photoperiod responsiveness. Grafting, expression, and double mutant analyses show that GIGAS/FTa1 regulates a mobile flowering stimulus but also provide clear evidence for a second mobile flowering stimulus that is correlated with expression of FTb2 in leaf tissue. These results suggest that induction of flowering by photoperiod in pea results from interactions among several members of a diversified FT family.     

Chromatin regulation of flowering

The transition to flowering is a major developmental switch in the life cycle of plants. In Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), chromatin mechanisms play critical roles in flowering-time regulation through the expression control of key flowering-regulatory genes. Various conserved chromatin modifiers, plant-specific factors, and long noncoding RNAs are involved in chromatin regulation of FLOWERING LOCUS C (FLC, a potent floral repressor). The well-studied FLC regulation has provided a paradigm for chromatin-based control of other developmental genes. In addition, chromatin modification plays an important role in the regulation of FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT, encoding florigen), which is widely conserved in angiosperm species. The chromatin mechanisms underlying FT regulation in Arabidopsis are likely involved in the regulation of FT relatives and, therefore, flowering-time control in other plants.     

The molecular basis of vernalization-induced flowering in cereals

Genetic analyses have identified three genes that control the vernalization requirement in wheat and barley; VRN1, VRN2 and FT (VRN3). These genes have now been isolated and shown to regulate not only the vernalization response but also the promotion of flowering by long days. VRN1 is induced by vernalization and accelerates the transition to reproductive development at the shoot apex. FT is induced by long days and further accelerates reproductive apex development. VRN2, a floral repressor, integrates vernalization and day-length responses by repressing FT until plants are vernalized. A comparison of flowering time pathways in cereals and Arabidopsis shows that the vernalization response is controlled by different MADS box genes, but integration of vernalization and long-day responses occurs through similar mechanisms.