Emma J Tacken1, Hilary S Ireland, Yen-Yi Wang, Jo Putterill, Robert J Schaffer. 1. The New Zealand Institute of Plant and Food Research , Private Bag 92169, Auckland 1142 , New Zealand ; School of Biological Sciences, University of Auckland , Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1142 , New Zealand.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Fruit ripening in Malus× domestica (apple) is controlled by ethylene. Work in model species has shown that following the detection of ethylene, the ETHYLENE INSENSITIVE 3 (EIN3) transcription factor is stabilized, leading to an increase in transcript accumulation of ethylene-responsive genes, such as POLYGALACTURONASE1 (PG1). In the absence of ethylene, the EIN3 BINDING F-box (EBF) proteins rapidly degrade EIN3 via the ubiquitination/SCF (Skp, Cullin, F-Box) proteasome pathway. In this study, we aim to identify and characterize the apple EBF genes, and test their activity against apple EIN3-like proteins (EILs). METHODOLOGY: The apple genome sequence was mined for EBF-like genes. The expression of EBF-like genes was measured during fruit development. Using a transient assay in Nicotiana benthamiana leaves, the activity of three apple EILs was tested against the PG1 promoter, with and without ethylene and EBF1. PRINCIPAL RESULTS: Four EBF-like genes in apple were identified and grouped into two sub-clades. Sub-clade I genes had constant expression over fruit development while sub-clade II genes increased in expression at ripening. EBF1 was shown to reduce the transactivation of the apple PG1 promoter by the EIL1, EIL2 and EIL3 transcription factors in the presence of ethylene. CONCLUSIONS: The apple EBF1 gene identified here is likely to be a functionally conserved EBF orthologue, modulating EIL activity in apples. The activity of EBF1 suggests that it is not specific to a single EIL, instead acting as a global regulator of apple EIL transcription factors.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Fruit ripening in Malus× domestica (apple) is controlled by ethylene. Work in model species has shown that following the detection of ethylene, the ETHYLENE INSENSITIVE 3 (EIN3) transcription factor is stabilized, leading to an increase in transcript accumulation of ethylene-responsive genes, such as POLYGALACTURONASE1 (PG1). In the absence of ethylene, the EIN3 BINDING F-box (EBF) proteins rapidly degrade EIN3 via the ubiquitination/SCF (Skp, Cullin, F-Box) proteasome pathway. In this study, we aim to identify and characterize the apple EBF genes, and test their activity against appleEIN3-like proteins (EILs). METHODOLOGY: The apple genome sequence was mined for EBF-like genes. The expression of EBF-like genes was measured during fruit development. Using a transient assay in Nicotiana benthamiana leaves, the activity of three apple EILs was tested against the PG1 promoter, with and without ethylene and EBF1. PRINCIPAL RESULTS: Four EBF-like genes in apple were identified and grouped into two sub-clades. Sub-clade I genes had constant expression over fruit development while sub-clade II genes increased in expressionat ripening. EBF1 was shown to reduce the transactivation of the applePG1 promoter by the EIL1, EIL2 and EIL3 transcription factors in the presence of ethylene. CONCLUSIONS: The appleEBF1 gene identified here is likely to be a functionally conserved EBF orthologue, modulating EIL activity in apples. The activity of EBF1 suggests that it is not specific to a single EIL, instead acting as a global regulator of apple EIL transcription factors.
Ethylene is involved in a wide range of developmental processes in plants including
seed germination, cell elongation, sex determination, fruit ripening, senescence and
leaf abscission, as well as biotic and abiotic stress responses (Abeles and Biles 1991; Barry and Giovannoni 2007; Lin ). The
ethylene response pathway can be briefly summarized as follows: the pathway is
thought to be predominantly linear, consisting of ethylene receptors, which in the
absence of ethylene constitutively repress the activity of the MAP kinase
CONSTITUTIVE TRIPLE RESPONSE1 (CTR1); this modulates the activity of ETHYLENE
INSENSITIVE 2 (EIN2), which results in the destabilization of the ETHYLENE
INSENSITIVE 3 (EIN3) transcription factors. In the presence of ethylene this pathway
is repressed and EIN3 is stabilized, initiating a transcriptional cascade leading to
an ethylene response (Chen ).In the absence of ethylene, EIN3 is short-lived with a half-life of <30 min
due to rapid degradation through the ubiquitin/Skp, Cullin, F-Box degradation
pathway (Guo and Ecker 2003; Yanagisawa ).
In Arabidopsis, two redundant nuclear localized F-box proteins,
EIN3-BINDING F BOX PROTEIN1 (AtEBF1) and AtEBF2, were shown to target EIN3 and a
functional homologue EIN3-like 1 (EIL1) for degradation (Guo and Ecker 2003; Potuschak ; Binder ). Loss-of-function
ebf1ebf2 double mutants had high levels of EIN3 protein and
consequently exhibited a constitutive ethylene response (Chao ; Potuschak ). While EBF1 and
EBF2 in Arabidopsis are constitutively expressed over plant
development, they both show an increase in expression with exogenously added
ethylene, and over-expression of EBF1 resulted in reduced EIN3
levels leading to an ethylene-insensitive phenotype. These results suggest that the
EBF-like genes are controlled, at least in part, at the
transcription level (Potuschak ).In tomato, two EBF-like genes have also been identified:
EBF1 and EBF2 (Yang ). Consistent with the
results in Arabidopsis, silencing of either gene resulted in plants
that were indistinguishable from controls, indicating that they are functionally
redundant. The results suggested a feedback mechanism whereby suppression of one
EBF gene resulted in an increase in transcription of the
second. As in Arabidopsis, a constitutive ethylene response
phenotype was observed when both EBF1 and EBF2
were silenced in tomato, including accelerated fruit ripening (Yang ). However, unlike
Arabidopsis, the expression of tomatoEBF1 and
EBF2 was not constitutive, with a transient decrease in
expressionat the onset of ripening (mature green), and consistent with
Arabidopsis both showed an increase of expression with ethylene
and a decrease with auxin (Yang ). TomatoEBF1 appeared to be less
affected at the transcriptional level, while EBF2 appeared to be
more transcriptionally variable (Yang
).In the fleshy fruiting apple, ethylene plays a key role in the control of fruit
ripening. The importance of ethylene in apple fruit ripening was confirmed with the
suppression of the ripening-associated ethylene biosynthesis gene ACC
OXIDASE 1 (ACO1). In these apples, no
ripening-associated flesh softening or aroma volatiles are produced (Schaffer ;
Johnston ). Owing to consumer requirements to maintain a firm texture, many
commercial apples have been selected for low ripening-related ethylene. This has
been achieved in part through the selection of lines with disrupted ethylene
biosynthetic gene ACC SYNTHASE (ACS), leading to
longer storage capacity and slower softening (Harada ; Costa ; Wiersma ; Wang ). Owing
to the importance of ethylene in fruit ripening, much of the molecular biology
research conducted in apple has been focused on ethylene biosynthesis and response.
One of the earliest genes cloned from apple was the ETHYLENE RESPONSE
1 (ETR1)-like receptor (Lee ), along with the
ethylene biosynthetic gene ACO1 (Lay-Yee and Knighton 1995). Subsequent work identified
four other receptor-like genes, a CTR1-like gene, an
EIN2-like gene (Wiersma
) and three EIN3-like
genes (Tacken ). With the release of the complete apple genome sequence (Velasco ),
there is now a growing literature studying whole gene families (Devoghalaere ), which has led to the identification of three further receptor genes in
apple (Ireland ).While five EIN3-like genes have been identified in
Arabidopsis, ethylene signal transduction occurs predominantly
through the action of two of them, EIN3 and EIL1. Originally identified through an
ethylene-insensitive phenotype, it was proposed that EIN3 acted by binding and
activating the promoters of the AP2/ERF class of transcription factors (Solano ).
Since this study, it has been shown that EIN3-like transcription factors are likely
to be involved directly in the activation of a suite of ethylene biosynthesis and
response genes (Huang ; Tacken ; Yin
), and transient assays suggest that EIL2
and EIL3 in apple may be involved in the up-regulation of key apple ripening genes
such as the cell wall hydrolase endo-POLYGALACTURONASE 1
(PG1) (Tacken ).Owing to the importance of the EBF class of genes as key controllers
of the ethylene signal transduction pathway, this study used the apple genome
sequence to identify EBF-like genes. One EBF-like
gene (EBF1) was cloned and tested for the ability to inhibit the
activity of three EILs in a Nicotiana benthamiana transient
assay.
Methods
Identification of the apple EBF genes and generation of a phylogeny
EBF-like genes were mined from the predicted peptide models from the apple genome
using BLASTP. To verify the DNA sequence of the selected gene models, the DNA
sequence from each EBF-like gene was compared with expressed
sequence tag (EST) sequences. Predicted amino acid sequences were aligned in
Geneious Pro™ version 4.8.4 (Biomatters, Auckland, New Zealand) (Drummond ). Phylogenetic trees were created in Geneious Pro™ using the
PHYML substitution method (Guindon and
Gascuel 2003) with the JTT model (Jones ). A total of 1000
replicates of each tree were used to generate bootstrap data. EBF sequences from
other species used to construct the phylogenetic tree were: Fragaria
vesca FvEBF1 (strawberry gene model 1520754), FvEBF2 (gene model
1540140) (), the Malus gene models shown in
Table 1 and EBF-like
protein sequences drawn from published work (Yang );
Arabidopsis thalianaAtEBF1 (NP_565597), AtEBF2
(NP_197917), AtFBL4 (NP_567467), AtTIR1 (NP_567135), AtZTL (NP_568855),
Brassica oleracea BoF-box (ACB59221), OsF-box (BAD15849),
Populus trichocarpa PtEBF3 (EEE92188), PtEBF4 (EEE92505),
PtF-box (EEF03786), Solanum lycopersicumSlEBF1 (ACS44349) and
SlEBF2 (ACS44350).
Table 1
Apple EBF-like genes.
Gene name
Gene model
Chromosome
Position (Mb)
EBF1
MDP0000239011
MDP0000314942
8
18.66
EBF101
MDP0000429728
MDP0000280142
15
5.98
EBF2
MDP0000230402
15
10.55
EBF102
MDP0000165656
2
3.02
Apple EBF-like genes.
Quantification of gene expression
Gene expression levels from a fruit development cDNA series (Janssen )
were determined via quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) using the
Lightcycler480™ (Roche, Basel, Switzerland). Primers for
PG1, ACO1 and EIL1-3 are
as described in Tacken , and for ACTIN as described
in Espley . Primers to measure the expression of each of the
EBF genes were as follows: EBF1F, TCGCAAGAGGTCTCGCATCAGC;
EBF1R, CCTCGCCTCCAGGAATCCGT; EBF101F, TTCCTGCTTGGGATTGAAAGATG; EBF101R,
GCTCCAGTTGAGGGCAAAGC; EBF2F, AGGTTGTGCCCTCAGCTACATAATA; EBF2R,
ACCAACGACACAACTGCTTTATCC; EBF102F, GCCCTCAGCTCCATAATGTAGACA; EBF102R,
CCAACGCCATAACGACTTCATCT.All reactions were carried out in quadruplicate using SYBR®
Green Master Mix (Roche) according to the manufacturer's instructions
with ACTIN used as the reference gene, and the qPCR products
sequenced to verify the amplification of the correct gene.
Determination of activation using the dual luciferase transient assay
system
Tobacco plants were grown in the greenhouse for 2 weeks under long-day conditions
until at least two leaves had developed a surface area of at least 1.5
cm2. Agrobacterium tumefaciens GV3101
transformed with promoter fragments in the pGreenII 0800:Luc vector and the
pSOUP helper plasmid (Hellens ) and Agrobacterium containing
the candidate EILs or EBF1 fused to the
CaMV35S promoter in the pART7/27 transformation vector were
suspended in 8 mL of infiltration buffer (Hellens ) to obtain an optical density
at 600 nm of 0.6 Agrobacterium. The leaves of young
N.benthamiana plants were infiltrated with
two aliquots of 500 μL of combined PG1
promoter/EIL/EBF1at a ratio of 1 : 3.5 :
3.5. In the controls, Agrobacterium containing either the
EIN3-like genes or EBF1 was substituted
for Agrobacterium containing an empty CaMV35S
promoter construct (Voinnet ; Hellens
). Plants were grown for 3 days and
then four independent leaf punches were assayed using a Berthold Orion
Microplate Luminometer (Berthold, Bad Wilbad, Germany) according to the
specifications for the dual luciferase assay (Hellens ). Luminescence
was calculated using Simplicity software, version 4.02 (Berthold). To minimize
the effect of background activation levels, only readings with a Renilla value
of >1000 were included in the analysis. These infiltrations were repeated
three times and the averages of these experiments are given. Significant
differences were calculated using analysis of variance.
Results
Identification of apple EBF-like genes
The protein sequences of ArabidopsisEBF1 and EBF2 were used to
identify EBF-like genes within the predicted peptide models from the apple
genome (Velasco ) using BLASTP. Six gene models with a high BLAST score
(P < e-150) were selected. The next highest apple
model (MDP0000224875) had a considerably lower BLAST score (P
< e-37) and only showed homology in the N-terminal F-box region,
suggesting that this was unlikely to be within the EBF group of F-box proteins.
When these proteins were aligned each was found to have the expected F-box
region, and leucine-rich repeats were found in EBF-like genes (Fig. 1). Reciprocal BLASTP comparisons of
the six apple peptide models with the Arabidopsis proteins
selected EBF1 and EBF2 as the most similar Arabidopsis
proteins. The six apple peptide models aligned to four unique chromosomal
locations: two on chromosome 15, one on chromosome 2 and one on chromosome 8
(Table 1). Two of the
chromosomal loci had two models each, suggesting that apple has four
EBF-like genes. To test whether the gene models were
correctly constructed, the DNA sequences of the four predicted protein sequences
were compared with sequences from both an apple EST collection (Newcomb ) and short read (100 bp) data from mRNA seq analysis from ripe
‘Royal Gala’ fruit (Schaffer
). In two cases the predicted gene
models differed from the EST sequences, firstly EBF1 (with two
gene models MDP0000314942 and a shorter model MDP0000239011) both extended
3′ beyond the region covered by ESTs. A single clone from a ‘Royal
Gala’ cDNA library was fully sequenced, verifying that the gene was
shorter in length than the gene models supplied (GenBank JX512439). When this
new sequence was translated, the C-terminus was more consistent with the length
of the Arabidopsis and tomato EBF genes.
Secondly, the model for EBF2 (MDP0000230402) was 25 amino acids longer than the
other EBF-like proteins at the N-terminus. Alignment of mRNA seq reads to the
apple genome suggested that this model was incorrectly annotated at the
5′ end, with these new data the start codon was consistent with other
EBF-like proteins [see Additional information: Supplemental Data 1]. Phylogenetic alignment was conducted with
the four predicted apple EBF-like proteins, two genes selected in a similar way
from the Fragaria vesca (strawberry) genome (Shulaev )
and the EBF-like proteins from Yang
. The phylogenetic alignment showed
that the selected apple proteins fell into the same clade as the
Arabidopsis (EBF1 and EBF2) and tomato (EBF1 and EBF2)
proteins, suggesting that these were likely to be apple EBF orthologues
(Fig. 2). The four apple
proteins were separated into two proteins per sub-clade, with each sub-clade
containing a single strawberry protein. This duplication was consistent with the
ancient genome duplication event reported in apple (Velasco ). The four
selected apple EBF-like genes were assigned gene names as
described in Devoghalaere . As both ArabidopsisEBF1
and EBF2 fell into sub-clade I containing tomatoEBF1, the apple genes were
named by the closest tomato genes, with strawberryEBF1 and the apple
homeologues EBF1 and EBF101 grouping with the tomatoEBF1 gene, and strawberryEBF2 and apple homeologues EBF2 and EBF102 grouping with tomatoEBF2 in
sub-clade II (Fig. 2).
Fig. 1
Alignment of the EBF1 protein sequences. The four
predicted apple EBF proteins were aligned. The conserved F-box
domain (red) and the 13 leucine-rich repeats (LRR—green) are
shown underneath.
Fig. 2
Phylogenetic alignment of members of the EIN3 BINDING
F-box (EBF) family proteins from different plant species.
A phylogenetic tree was generated using PHYML; values given are
bootstrap percentages (1000 replicates). EBF-like proteins from
apple (Malus domestica—Md), strawberry
(Fragaria vesca—Fv), poplar
(Populus trichocarpa—Pt), tomato
(Solanum lycopersicum—Sl),
Brassica oleracea (Bo), rice (Oryza
sativa—Os) and Arabidopsis
thaliana (At) were compared with AtFBL4 and AtTIR used
as outgroups.
Alignment of the EBF1 protein sequences. The four
predicted apple EBF proteins were aligned. The conserved F-box
domain (red) and the 13 leucine-rich repeats (LRR—green) are
shown underneath.Phylogenetic alignment of members of the EIN3 BINDING
F-box (EBF) family proteins from different plant species.
A phylogenetic tree was generated using PHYML; values given are
bootstrap percentages (1000 replicates). EBF-like proteins from
apple (Malus domestica—Md), strawberry
(Fragaria vesca—Fv), poplar
(Populus trichocarpa—Pt), tomato
(Solanum lycopersicum—Sl),
Brassica oleracea (Bo), rice (Oryza
sativa—Os) and Arabidopsis
thaliana (At) were compared with AtFBL4 and AtTIR used
as outgroups.
Analysis of EBF1 expression
The expression of the EBF genes during apple fruit development was compared with
that of known ethylene biosynthesis genes (ACO1), potential
EBF-like targets EIL1, EIL2 and
EIL3 (Tacken
) and the cell wall modifying gene
PG1 (Fig. 3). Expression of EBF1 and EBF101
was similar to that of EIL1 and EIL3, and did
not change significantly over the course of fruit development or at the onset of
fruit ripening at 132 days after full bloom (DAFB), though a slight increase in
expression was observed at 146 DAFB (Fig. 3). The expression of EBF2 and EBF102 was low early in
fruit development, increasing as the fruit matured and ripened. This expression
was more consistent with that of ethylene-responsive genes such as
ACO1 and PG1, which had a significant
increase in expressionat the onset of fruit ripening (data from Tacken ).
Fig. 3
Expression patterns of Expression of
EBF1, EBF2,
EBF3 and EBF4 was measured in
cDNA derived from fruit tissue over the course of apple fruit
development by qPCR. Expression levels are shown relative to the
ACTIN gene. Expression levels of
ACO1, PG1 and
EIL1-3 are reported in Tacken .
Expression patterns of Expression of
EBF1, EBF2,
EBF3 and EBF4 was measured in
cDNA derived from fruit tissue over the course of apple fruit
development by qPCR. Expression levels are shown relative to the
ACTIN gene. Expression levels of
ACO1, PG1 and
EIL1-3 are reported in Tacken .
Functional analysis of EBF1 in a transient assay
It has previously been shown that a 2.6-kb applePG1 promoter
fused to the LUCIFERASE gene can be trans-activated when
injected into a N. benthamiana leaf in the presence of
exogenous ethylene (Tacken ). When the EIL2 and
EIL3 transcription factors, driven by a
CaMV35S promoter, were co-injected with the
PG1 promoter in the presence of ethylene, an increased
transactivation of the PG1 promoter occurred, especially with
EIL2 (Tacken
). To test whether the EBF1 protein
can destabilize the apple EIL proteins and thus block their transactivation of
PG1, the EIL2 and EIL3
constructs as well as a construct containing EIL1 were
co-infiltrated with the PG1 promoter, with and without EBF1.
Each assay was performed either in the presence or absence of ethylene. In this
study, appleEIL1 trans-activated the PG1 promoter in the presence of ethylene
to a much higher level than EIL2 and EIL3 (Fig. 4). When co-infiltrated with the EBF1
gene, the levels of trans-activation were greatly reduced with all three apple
EILs, consistent with the activity of an EBF-like F-box protein. Interestingly,
a level of inhibition by the EBF1 was also observed in non-ethylene-treated
leaves. This suggests that the act of infiltrating
Agrobacterium into the N. benthamiana
leaves may elicit an ethylene-induced defence response in the leaves, which by
itself can trans-activate the PG1 promoter (Fig. 4).
Fig. 4
The transactivation of the apple PG1 promoter by EIL1 to
EIL3 with and without EBF1. A dual luciferase transient
assay system was used to examine the activity of EBF1 on the
transactivation of the PG1 promoter by EIL1, EIL2
and EIL3 with and without exogenous ethylene (100 μL
L-1). Transactivation was measured as a ratio of
luminescence from the luciferase activity compared with an
infiltration control measured by Renilla activity. Controls are the
PG1 promoter and an empty vector control; error
bars represent the S.E.M. (n = 4). Letters
depict bars that are significantly different with a
P value <0.05, and an asterisk indicates
significant levels of inactivation (P <
0.05).
The transactivation of the applePG1 promoter by EIL1 to
EIL3 with and without EBF1. A dual luciferase transient
assay system was used to examine the activity of EBF1 on the
transactivation of the PG1 promoter by EIL1, EIL2
and EIL3 with and without exogenous ethylene (100 μL
L-1). Transactivation was measured as a ratio of
luminescence from the luciferase activity compared with an
infiltration control measured by Renilla activity. Controls are the
PG1 promoter and an empty vector control; error
bars represent the S.E.M. (n = 4). Letters
depict bars that are significantly different with a
P value <0.05, and an asterisk indicates
significant levels of inactivation (P <
0.05).
Discussion
A rapidly growing number of plant genomes have now been sequenced, giving researchers
a valuable insight into these organisms beyond the traditional model species. While
these genomes allow researchers to look at features that are unique to different and
often commercially important plant species, it is important to translate knowledge
gained from model systems to these species of interest. In this study, we build on
the growing literature of ethylene-related genes in apple (Lee ; Wiersma ; Tacken ;
Ireland ) by the characterization of the EBF-like genes.
Interestingly, in apple there are four EBF-like genes, consistent
with the genome duplication, while the closely related Rosaceae species strawberry
has two. In the model species tomato and Arabidopsis, the
EBF family is encoded redundantly by at least two genes. In
Arabidopsis the two EBF genes fall into
sub-clade I, while tomato has one gene in each sub-clade (Fig. 2).In Arabidopsis, EBF1 and EBF2 mRNA is
constitutively expressed (Guo and Ecker
2003; Potuschak ) and has been shown to be targeted for degradation
by EIN5 (Olmedo ), suggesting that mRNA levels are actively regulated. In tomato,
EBF1 is constitutively expressed with EBF2
showing considerable changes in expression over development and in different
treatments (Yang ). From this observation it was suggested that as
EBF1 had a more consistent level of expression, it was
providing the steady-state level of EBF, and fluctuations of EBF2
allowed the plant to respond to the environment. In apples, the two classes of
EBF-like genes appear to follow the same pattern with sub-clade
I genes (EBF1 and EBF101) showing little variation
in expression, while the sub-clade II genes (EBF2 and
EBF102) both increase as the fruit begin to ripen. Although the
sub-clade I tomato gene EBF1 had a more consistent level of
expression, it did have lower expression in mature green fruit. This was not
observed in the expression pattern of EBF1 in apples, though as
this drop was transitory in tomato, there is a possibility that a similar drop in
apple would be missed in a less detailed time series experiment (Fig. 3).In this study, three appleEIN3-like genes were tested in a transient assay for
activity against the PG1 promoter. All three apple EILs had reduced
activity against the PG1 promoter, in the presence of EBF1, showing
that the appleEBF1 was not specific to a single EIL. The non-specific nature of the
EBFs is consistent with the ArabidopsisEBF1 and EBF2, where both
interact with EIN3 and EIL1, again suggesting a lack of specificity in these F-box
proteins to individual EIL proteins.
Conclusions and forward look
An F-box gene EBF1 was identified in apple, the predicted protein
product of which clustered with EBF-like proteins involved in the
ethylene response in other plant species. EBF1 negatively regulated
activation of PG1 by the apple EILs, consistent
with the degradation of EIN3 by EBF1 and EBF2 observed in
Arabidopsis and tomato. These results also suggest that appleEBF1 acts as a functional EBF upon multiple members of the EIL family of
transcription factors. This work suggests that the EBF-like genes
in apple are likely to play a crucial role in the control of ethylene-related fruit
ripening.
Additional information
The following additional information is available in the online version of this
article
–Text files of apple
Accession numbers
AppleEBF1 GenBank accession no. JX512439.
Sources of funding
This work was funded by The Agriculture and Marketing Research and
Development Trust of New Zealand (AgMardt), The
University of Auckland, New Zealand and the
Foundation of Science and Research Technology
(FRST) contract C06X0705; Pipfruit, a
juicy future.
Contributions by the authors
The project was conceived, executed and the first draft written by E.J.T. Sequencing,
cloning and expression analysis were undertaken by E.J.T. H.S.I. and Y.-Y.W. This
work was part of E.J.T.'s PhD project funded by AgMardt PhD scholarship (NZ),
supervised by and edited by R.J.S. and J.P.
Authors: Vladimir Shulaev; Daniel J Sargent; Ross N Crowhurst; Todd C Mockler; Otto Folkerts; Arthur L Delcher; Pankaj Jaiswal; Keithanne Mockaitis; Aaron Liston; Shrinivasrao P Mane; Paul Burns; Thomas M Davis; Janet P Slovin; Nahla Bassil; Roger P Hellens; Clive Evans; Tim Harkins; Chinnappa Kodira; Brian Desany; Oswald R Crasta; Roderick V Jensen; Andrew C Allan; Todd P Michael; Joao Carlos Setubal; Jean-Marc Celton; D Jasper G Rees; Kelly P Williams; Sarah H Holt; Juan Jairo Ruiz Rojas; Mithu Chatterjee; Bo Liu; Herman Silva; Lee Meisel; Avital Adato; Sergei A Filichkin; Michela Troggio; Roberto Viola; Tia-Lynn Ashman; Hao Wang; Palitha Dharmawardhana; Justin Elser; Rajani Raja; Henry D Priest; Douglas W Bryant; Samuel E Fox; Scott A Givan; Larry J Wilhelm; Sushma Naithani; Alan Christoffels; David Y Salama; Jade Carter; Elena Lopez Girona; Anna Zdepski; Wenqin Wang; Randall A Kerstetter; Wilfried Schwab; Schuyler S Korban; Jahn Davik; Amparo Monfort; Beatrice Denoyes-Rothan; Pere Arus; Ron Mittler; Barry Flinn; Asaph Aharoni; Jeffrey L Bennetzen; Steven L Salzberg; Allan W Dickerman; Riccardo Velasco; Mark Borodovsky; Richard E Veilleux; Kevin M Folta Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2010-12-26 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Emma Tacken; Hilary Ireland; Kularajathevan Gunaseelan; Sakuntala Karunairetnam; Daisy Wang; Keith Schultz; Judith Bowen; Ross G Atkinson; Jason W Johnston; Jo Putterill; Roger P Hellens; Robert J Schaffer Journal: Plant Physiol Date: 2010-03-17 Impact factor: 8.340
Authors: Gabriela Olmedo; Hongwei Guo; Brian D Gregory; Saeid D Nourizadeh; Laura Aguilar-Henonin; Hongjiang Li; Fengying An; Plinio Guzman; Joseph R Ecker Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2006-08-18 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Brad M Binder; Joseph M Walker; Jennifer M Gagne; Thomas J Emborg; Georg Hemmann; Anthony B Bleecker; Richard D Vierstra Journal: Plant Cell Date: 2007-02-16 Impact factor: 11.277