LIGHT-REGULATED WD1 and PSEUDO-RESPONSE REGULATOR9 form a positive feedback regulatory loop in the Arabidopsis circadian clock

In Arabidopsis thaliana, central circadian clock genes constitute several feedback loops. These interlocking loops generate an ~24-h oscillation that enables plants to anticipate the daily diurnal environment. The identification of additional clock proteins can help dissect the complex nature of the circadian clock. Previously, LIGHT-REGULATED WD1 (LWD1) and LWD2 were identified as two clock proteins regulating circadian period length and photoperiodic flowering. Here, we systematically studied the function of LWD1/2 in the Arabidopsis circadian clock. Analysis of the lwd1 lwd2 double mutant revealed that LWD1/2 plays dual functions in the light input pathway and the regulation of the central oscillator. Promoter:luciferase fusion studies showed that activities of LWD1/2 promoters are rhythmic and depend on functional PSEUDO-RESPONSE REGULATOR9 (PRR9) and PRR7. LWD1/2 is also needed for the expression of PRR9, PRR7, and PRR5. LWD1 is preferentially localized within the nucleus and associates with promoters of PRR9, PRR5, and TOC1 in vivo. Our results support the existence of a positive feedback loop within the Arabidopsis circadian clock. Further mechanistic studies of this positive feedback loop and its regulatory effects on the other clock components will further elucidate the complex nature of the Arabidopsis circadian clock.     

A spatial model of the plant circadian clock reveals design principles for coordinated timing

Individual plant cells possess a genetic network, the circadian clock, that times internal processes to the day‐night cycle. Mathematical models of the clock are typically either “whole‐plant” that ignore tissue or cell type‐specific clock behavior, or “phase‐only” that do not include molecular components. To address the complex spatial coordination observed in experiments, here we implemented a clock network model on a template of a seedling. In our model, the sensitivity to light varies across the plant, and cells communicate their timing via local or long‐distance sharing of clock components, causing their rhythms to couple. We found that both varied light sensitivity and long‐distance coupling could generate period differences between organs, while local coupling was required to generate the spatial waves of clock gene expression observed experimentally. We then examined our model under noisy light‐dark cycles and found that local coupling minimized timing errors caused by the noise while allowing each plant region to maintain a different clock phase. Thus, local sensitivity to environmental inputs combined with local coupling enables flexible yet robust circadian timing.