Jie Cao1, Kaiye Liu1, Wanjun Song1, Jianing Zhang1, Yingyin Yao1, Mingming Xin1, Zhaorong Hu1, Huiru Peng1, Zhongfu Ni1, Qixin Sun1, Jinkun Du2. 1. State Key Laboratory for Agrobiotechnology and Key Laboratory of Crop Heterosis and Utilization (MOE) and Beijing Key Laboratory of Crop Genetic Improvement, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, People's Republic of China. 2. State Key Laboratory for Agrobiotechnology and Key Laboratory of Crop Heterosis and Utilization (MOE) and Beijing Key Laboratory of Crop Genetic Improvement, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, People's Republic of China. jkdu@cau.edu.cn.
Abstract
MAIN CONCLUSION: The function of SQUAMOSA PROMOTER-BINDING PROTEIN-BOX gene TaSPL14 in wheat is similar to that of OsSPL14 in rice in regulating plant height, panicle length, spikelet number, and thousand-grain weight of wheat, but differs during tiller development. TaSPL14 may regulate spike development via ethylene-response gene EIN3-LIKE 1 (TaEIL1), ETHYLENE-RESPONSIVE TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR 2.11 (TaRAP2.11), and ETHYLENE-RESPONSIVE TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR 1 (TaERF1), but not DENSE AND ERECT PANICLE 1 (TaDEP1) in wheat. The SQUAMOSA PROMOTER-BINDING PROTEIN-LIKE gene OsSPL14 from rice is considered to be a major determinant of ideal plant architecture consisting of few unproductive tillers, more grains per spike, and high resistance of stems to lodging. However, the function of its orthologous gene, TaSPL14, in wheat is unknown. Here, we reported the functional similarities and differences between TaSPL14 and OsSPL14. Similar to OsSPL14 knock-outs in rice, wheat TaSPL14 knock-out plants exhibited decreased plant height, panicle length, spikelet number, and thousand-grain weight. In contrast to OsSPL14, however, TaSPL14 did not affect tiller number. Transcriptome analysis revealed that the expression of genes related to ethylene response was significantly decreased in young spikes of TaSPL14 knock-out lines as compared with wild type. TaSPL14 directly binds to the promoters of the ethylene-response genes TaEIL1, TaRAP2.11, and TaERF1, and promotes their expression, suggesting that TaSPL14 might regulate wheat spike development via the ethylene-response pathway. The elucidation of TaSPL14 will contribute to understanding of the molecular mechanisms that underlie wheat plant architecture.
MAIN CONCLUSION: The function of SQUAMOSA PROMOTER-BINDING PROTEIN-BOX gene TaSPL14 in wheat is similar to that of OsSPL14 in rice in regulating plant height, panicle length, spikelet number, and thousand-grain weight of wheat, but differs during tiller development. TaSPL14 may regulate spike development via ethylene-response gene EIN3-LIKE 1 (TaEIL1), ETHYLENE-RESPONSIVE TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR 2.11 (TaRAP2.11), and ETHYLENE-RESPONSIVE TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR 1 (TaERF1), but not DENSE AND ERECT PANICLE 1 (TaDEP1) in wheat. The SQUAMOSA PROMOTER-BINDING PROTEIN-LIKE gene OsSPL14 from rice is considered to be a major determinant of ideal plant architecture consisting of few unproductive tillers, more grains per spike, and high resistance of stems to lodging. However, the function of its orthologous gene, TaSPL14, in wheat is unknown. Here, we reported the functional similarities and differences between TaSPL14 and OsSPL14. Similar to OsSPL14 knock-outs in rice, wheat TaSPL14 knock-out plants exhibited decreased plant height, panicle length, spikelet number, and thousand-grain weight. In contrast to OsSPL14, however, TaSPL14 did not affect tiller number. Transcriptome analysis revealed that the expression of genes related to ethylene response was significantly decreased in young spikes of TaSPL14 knock-out lines as compared with wild type. TaSPL14 directly binds to the promoters of the ethylene-response genes TaEIL1, TaRAP2.11, and TaERF1, and promotes their expression, suggesting that TaSPL14 might regulate wheat spike development via the ethylene-response pathway. The elucidation of TaSPL14 will contribute to understanding of the molecular mechanisms that underlie wheat plant architecture.
Authors: J Peng; D E Richards; N M Hartley; G P Murphy; K M Devos; J E Flintham; J Beales; L J Fish; A J Worland; F Pelica; D Sudhakar; P Christou; J W Snape; M D Gale; N P Harberd Journal: Nature Date: 1999-07-15 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Roger P Hellens; Andrew C Allan; Ellen N Friel; Karen Bolitho; Karryn Grafton; Matthew D Templeton; Sakuntala Karunairetnam; Andrew P Gleave; William A Laing Journal: Plant Methods Date: 2005-12-18 Impact factor: 4.993
Authors: Bernardo J Clavijo; Luca Venturini; Christian Schudoma; Gonzalo Garcia Accinelli; Gemy Kaithakottil; Jonathan Wright; Philippa Borrill; George Kettleborough; Darren Heavens; Helen Chapman; James Lipscombe; Tom Barker; Fu-Hao Lu; Neil McKenzie; Dina Raats; Ricardo H Ramirez-Gonzalez; Aurore Coince; Ned Peel; Lawrence Percival-Alwyn; Owen Duncan; Josua Trösch; Guotai Yu; Dan M Bolser; Guy Namaati; Arnaud Kerhornou; Manuel Spannagl; Heidrun Gundlach; Georg Haberer; Robert P Davey; Christine Fosker; Federica Di Palma; Andrew L Phillips; A Harvey Millar; Paul J Kersey; Cristobal Uauy; Ksenia V Krasileva; David Swarbreck; Michael W Bevan; Matthew D Clark Journal: Genome Res Date: 2017-05 Impact factor: 9.043
Authors: Fei He; Wei Wang; William B Rutter; Katherine W Jordan; Jie Ren; Ellie Taagen; Noah DeWitt; Deepmala Sehgal; Sivakumar Sukumaran; Susanne Dreisigacker; Matthew Reynolds; Jyotirmoy Halder; Sunish Kumar Sehgal; Shuyu Liu; Jianli Chen; Allan Fritz; Jason Cook; Gina Brown-Guedira; Mike Pumphrey; Arron Carter; Mark Sorrells; Jorge Dubcovsky; Matthew J Hayden; Alina Akhunova; Peter L Morrell; Les Szabo; Matthew Rouse; Eduard Akhunov Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2022-02-11 Impact factor: 17.694