| Literature DB >> 32546127 |
Yi Xu1, Zhiqiang Jin2, Biyu Xu2, Jingyang Li1, Yujia Li1, Xiaoyi Wang1, Anbang Wang1, Wei Hu2, Dongmei Huang1, Qing Wei1, Zhuye Xu3, Shun Song4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Drought stress can severely affect plant growth and crop yield. The cloning and identification of drought-inducible promoters would be of value for genetically-based strategies to improve resistance of crops to drought.Entities:
Keywords: 5′ deletion; Aquaporin; Banana; Droutht stress; Promoter; Transcription factor
Year: 2020 PMID: 32546127 PMCID: PMC7298759 DOI: 10.1186/s12870-020-02472-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Plant Biol ISSN: 1471-2229 Impact factor: 4.215
Known cis-acting elements in the pMaPIP1;1 using the PlantCARE and PLACE databases
Fig. 1The 1362 bp promoter and the cis-acting element of MaPIP1;1. known cis-acting elements are shown in the right. The descriptions of elements see Table 1
Fig. 2GUS activity in transgenic Arabidopsis. (a) Histochemical GUS staining in the different tissues. (b) The constructs of the truncated fragments of pMaPIP1;1 fused with GUS. TSS, transcription start site. (c) Fluorometric GUS assays of M-P1--M-P4 transgenic Arabidopsis in comparison with the positive control CaMV35S promoter. Error bars show standard deviation. GUS activity was measured in pmol 4MU/μg protein/min. Values represent the mean ± standard deviation from three independent transgenic lines and each line five individual plants for each construct. Different lower case letters above the bars indicate significant differences at P < 0.05
Fig. 3GUS histochemical staining and fluorescent quantitative analysis of transgenic Arabidopsis expressing four truncated promoter of pMaPIP1;1::GUS under drought stress conditions. (a, c, e) GUS histochemical staining of transgenic Arabidopsis with 100 mM, 200 mM, 300 mM mannitol respectively. (b, d, f) GUS fluorescent quantitative analysis of transgenic Arabidopsis with 100 mM, 200 mM, 300 mM mannitol respectively. Values represent the mean ± standard deviation from three independent transgenic lines and each line five individual plants for each construct. Different lower case letters above the bars indicate significant differences at P < 0.05
Fig. 4Identifification of proteins interacting with pMaPIP1;1 by a Y1H assay. (A) Detection of positive clones against HIS3 reporter gene activation. (a.b.c) Adding to 0 mM, 100 mM, 150 mM 3AT respectively. (B) Positive colony rotation verification of HIS3 reporter gene detection. (a.b.c) Adding to 0 mM, 100 mM, 150 mM 3AT respectively
Fig. 5Expression analysis of 23 positive clones under drought stress of leave and root in the banana. The details shows in Table 1. Data are means ± SD of n = 3 biological replicates. Means denoted by the same letter are not significantly different at P < 0.05 as determined by Duncan’s multiple range test
Fig. 6Activation of MaPIP1;1 promoter in the transient expression system by MaMADS3. (A) Schematic diagrams of the transient expression vectors used in the transient expression analysis. (B) Relative LUC activity of vector pCaMV35S::MaMADS3-MaPIP1;1 Pro::LUC and pMaPIP1;1 Pro::LUC in tobacco. Data are means ± SD of n = 3 biological replicates. Means denoted by the same letter are not significantly different at P < 0.05 as determined by Duncan’s multiple range test