The domesticated transposase ALP2 mediates formation of a novel Polycomb protein complex by direct interaction with MSI1, a core subunit of Polycomb Repressive Complex 2 (PRC2).

A large fraction of plant genomes is composed of transposable elements (TE), which provide a potential source of novel genes through "domestication"-the process whereby the proteins encoded by TE diverge in sequence, lose their ability to catalyse transposition and instead acquire novel functions for their hosts. In Arabidopsis, ANTAGONIST OF LIKE HETEROCHROMATIN PROTEIN 1 (ALP1) arose by domestication of the nuclease component of Harbinger class TE and acquired a new function as a component of POLYCOMB REPRESSIVE COMPLEX 2 (PRC2), a histone H3K27me3 methyltransferase involved in regulation of host genes and in some cases TE. It was not clear how ALP1 associated with PRC2, nor what the functional consequence was. Here, we identify ALP2 genetically as a suppressor of Polycomb-group (PcG) mutant phenotypes and show that it arose from the second, DNA binding component of Harbinger transposases. Molecular analysis of PcG compromised backgrounds reveals that ALP genes oppose silencing and H3K27me3 deposition at key PcG target genes. Proteomic analysis reveals that ALP1 and ALP2 are components of a variant PRC2 complex that contains the four core components but lacks plant-specific accessory components such as the H3K27me3 reader LIKE HETEROCHROMATION PROTEIN 1 (LHP1). We show that the N-terminus of ALP2 interacts directly with ALP1, whereas the C-terminus of ALP2 interacts with MULTICOPY SUPPRESSOR OF IRA1 (MSI1), a core component of PRC2. Proteomic analysis reveals that in alp2 mutant backgrounds ALP1 protein no longer associates with PRC2, consistent with a role for ALP2 in recruitment of ALP1. We suggest that the propensity of Harbinger TE to insert in gene-rich regions of the genome, together with the modular two component nature of their transposases, has predisposed them for domestication and incorporation into chromatin modifying complexes.

SUPERMAN regulates floral whorl boundaries through control of auxin biosynthesis.

Proper floral patterning, including the number and position of floral organs in most plant species, is tightly controlled by the precise regulation of the persistence and size of floral meristems (FMs). In Arabidopsis, two known feedback pathways, one composed of WUSCHEL (WUS) and CLAVATA3 (CLV3) and the other composed of AGAMOUS (AG) and WUS, spatially and temporally control floral stem cells, respectively. However, mounting evidence suggests that other factors, including phytohormones, are also involved in floral meristem regulation. Here, we show that the boundary gene SUPERMAN (SUP) bridges floral organogenesis and floral meristem determinacy in another pathway that involves auxin signaling. SUP interacts with components of polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2) and fine-tunes local auxin signaling by negatively regulating the expression of the auxin biosynthesis genes YUCCA1/4 (YUC1/4). In sup mutants, derepressed local YUC1/4 activity elevates auxin levels at the boundary between whorls 3 and 4, which leads to an increase in the number and the prolonged maintenance of floral stem cells, and consequently an increase in the number of reproductive organs. Our work presents a new floral meristem regulatory mechanism, in which SUP, a boundary gene, coordinates floral organogenesis and floral meristem size through fine-tuning auxin biosynthesis.

Floral homeotic proteins modulate the genetic program for leaf development to suppress trichome formation in flowers.

As originally proposed by Goethe in 1790, floral organs are derived from leaf-like structures. The conversion of leaves into different types of floral organ is mediated by floral homeotic proteins, which, as described by the ABCE model of flower development, act in a combinatorial manner. However, how these transcription factors bring about this transformation process is not well understood. We have previously shown that floral homeotic proteins are involved in suppressing the formation of branched trichomes, a hallmark of leaf development, on reproductive floral organs of Arabidopsis Here, we present evidence that the activities of the C function gene AGAMOUS (AG) and the related SHATTERPROOF1/2 genes are superimposed onto the regulatory network that controls the distribution of trichome formation in an age-dependent manner. We show that AG regulates cytokinin responses and genetically interacts with the organ polarity gene KANADI1 to suppress trichome initiation on gynoecia. Thus, our results show that parts of the genetic program for leaf development remain active during flower formation but have been partially rewired through the activities of the floral homeotic proteins.

Transcription Factor Interplay between LEAFY and APETALA1/CAULIFLOWER during Floral Initiation.

The transcription factors LEAFY (LFY) and APETALA1 (AP1), together with the AP1 paralog CAULIFLOWER (CAL), control the onset of flower development in a partially redundant manner. This redundancy is thought to be mediated, at least in part, through the regulation of a shared set of target genes. However, whether these genes are independently or cooperatively regulated by LFY and AP1/CAL is currently unknown. To better understand the regulatory relationship between LFY and AP1/CAL and to obtain deeper insights into the control of floral initiation, we monitored the activity of LFY in the absence of AP1/CAL function. We found that the regulation of several known LFY target genes is unaffected by AP1/CAL perturbation, while others appear to require AP1/CAL activity. Furthermore, we obtained evidence that LFY and AP1/CAL control the expression of some genes in an antagonistic manner. Notably, these include key regulators of floral initiation such as TERMINAL FLOWER1 (TFL1), which had been previously reported to be directly repressed by both LFY and AP1. We show here that TFL1 expression is suppressed by AP1 but promoted by LFY. We further demonstrate that LFY has an inhibitory effect on flower formation in the absence of AP1/CAL activity. We propose that LFY and AP1/CAL act as part of an incoherent feed-forward loop, a network motif where two interconnected pathways or transcription factors act in opposite directions on a target gene, to control the establishment of a stable developmental program for the formation of flowers.

Post-embryonic Hourglass Patterns Mark Ontogenetic Transitions in Plant Development.

The historic developmental hourglass concept depicts the convergence of animal embryos to a common form during the phylotypic period. Recently, it has been shown that a transcriptomic hourglass is associated with this morphological pattern, consistent with the idea of underlying selective constraints due to intense molecular interactions during body plan establishment. Although plants do not exhibit a morphological hourglass during embryogenesis, a transcriptomic hourglass has nevertheless been identified in the model plant Arabidopsis thaliana Here, we investigated whether plant hourglass patterns are also found postembryonically. We found that the two main phase changes during the life cycle of Arabidopsis, from embryonic to vegetative and from vegetative to reproductive development, are associated with transcriptomic hourglass patterns. In contrast, flower development, a process dominated by organ formation, is not. This suggests that plant hourglass patterns are decoupled from organogenesis and body plan establishment. Instead, they may reflect general transitions through organizational checkpoints.

Gene network analysis of Arabidopsis thaliana flower development through dynamic gene perturbations.

Understanding how flowers develop from undifferentiated stem cells has occupied developmental biologists for decades. Key to unraveling this process is a detailed knowledge of the global regulatory hierarchies that control developmental transitions, cell differentiation and organ growth. These hierarchies may be deduced from gene perturbation experiments, which determine the effects on gene expression after specific disruption of a regulatory gene. Here, we tested experimental strategies for gene perturbation experiments during Arabidopsis thaliana flower development. We used artificial miRNAs (amiRNAs) to disrupt the functions of key floral regulators, and expressed them under the control of various inducible promoter systems that are widely used in the plant research community. To be able to perform genome-wide experiments with stage-specific resolution using the various inducible promoter systems for gene perturbation experiments, we also generated a series of floral induction systems that allow collection of hundreds of synchronized floral buds from a single plant. Based on our results, we propose strategies for performing dynamic gene perturbation experiments in flowers, and outline how they may be combined with versions of the floral induction system to dissect the gene regulatory network underlying flower development.

Control of reproductive floral organ identity specification in Arabidopsis by the C function regulator AGAMOUS.

The floral organ identity factor AGAMOUS (AG) is a key regulator of Arabidopsis thaliana flower development, where it is involved in the formation of the reproductive floral organs as well as in the control of meristem determinacy. To obtain insights into how AG specifies organ fate, we determined the genes and processes acting downstream of this C function regulator during early flower development and distinguished between direct and indirect effects. To this end, we combined genome-wide localization studies, gene perturbation experiments, and computational analyses. Our results demonstrate that AG controls flower development to a large extent by controlling the expression of other genes with regulatory functions, which are involved in mediating a plethora of different developmental processes. One aspect of this function is the suppression of the leaf development program in emerging floral primordia. Using trichome initiation as an example, we demonstrate that AG inhibits an important aspect of leaf development through the direct control of key regulatory genes. A comparison of the gene expression programs controlled by AG and the B function regulators APETALA3 and PISTILLATA, respectively, showed that while they control many developmental processes in conjunction, they also have marked antagonistic, as well as independent activities.

Patterns of gene expression during Arabidopsis flower development from the time of initiation to maturation.

BACKGROUND: The formation of flowers is one of the main model systems to elucidate the molecular mechanisms that control developmental processes in plants. Although several studies have explored gene expression during flower development in the model plant Arabidopsis thaliana on a genome-wide scale, a continuous series of expression data from the earliest floral stages until maturation has been lacking. Here, we used a floral induction system to close this information gap and to generate a reference dataset for stage-specific gene expression during flower formation. RESULTS: Using a floral induction system, we collected floral buds at 14 different stages from the time of initiation until maturation. Using whole-genome microarray analysis, we identified 7,405 genes that exhibit rapid expression changes during flower development. These genes comprise many known floral regulators and we found that the expression profiles for these regulators match their known expression patterns, thus validating the dataset. We analyzed groups of co-expressed genes for over-represented cellular and developmental functions through Gene Ontology analysis and found that they could be assigned specific patterns of activities, which are in agreement with the progression of flower development. Furthermore, by mapping binding sites of floral organ identity factors onto our dataset, we were able to identify gene groups that are likely predominantly under control of these transcriptional regulators. We further found that the distribution of paralogs among groups of co-expressed genes varies considerably, with genes expressed predominantly at early and intermediate stages of flower development showing the highest proportion of such genes. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight and describe the dynamic expression changes undergone by a large number of genes during flower development. They further provide a comprehensive reference dataset for temporal gene expression during flower formation and we demonstrate that it can be used to integrate data from other genomics approaches such as genome-wide localization studies of transcription factor binding sites.

Molecular basis for the specification of floral organs by APETALA3 and PISTILLATA.

How different organs are formed from small sets of undifferentiated precursor cells is a key question in developmental biology. To understand the molecular mechanisms underlying organ specification in plants, we studied the function of the homeotic selector genes APETALA3 (AP3) and PISTILLATA (PI), which control the formation of petals and stamens during Arabidopsis flower development. To this end, we characterized the activities of the transcription factors that AP3 and PI encode throughout flower development by using perturbation assays as well as transcript profiling and genomewide localization studies, in combination with a floral induction system that allows a stage-specific analysis of flower development by genomic technologies. We discovered considerable spatial and temporal differences in the requirement for AP3/PI activity during flower formation and show that they control different sets of genes at distinct phases of flower development. The genomewide identification of target genes revealed that AP3/PI act as bifunctional transcription factors: they activate genes involved in the control of numerous developmental processes required for organogenesis and repress key regulators of carpel formation. Our results imply considerable changes in the composition and topology of the gene network controlled by AP3/PI during the course of flower development. We discuss our results in light of a model for the mechanism underlying sex-determination in seed plants, in which AP3/PI orthologues might act as a switch between the activation of male and the repression of female development.

Gene networks controlling Arabidopsis thaliana flower development.

The formation of flowers is one of the main models for studying the regulatory mechanisms that underlie plant development and evolution. Over the past three decades, extensive genetic and molecular analyses have led to the identification of a large number of key floral regulators and to detailed insights into how they control flower morphogenesis. In recent years, genome-wide approaches have been applied to obtaining a global view of the gene regulatory networks underlying flower formation. Furthermore, mathematical models have been developed that can simulate certain aspects of this process and drive further experimentation. Here, we review some of the main findings made in the field of Arabidopsis thaliana flower development, with an emphasis on recent advances. In particular, we discuss the activities of the floral organ identity factors, which are pivotal for the specification of the different types of floral organs, and explore the experimental avenues that may elucidate the molecular mechanisms and gene expression programs through which these master regulators of flower development act.

Specification of floral organs in Arabidopsis.

Floral organs are specified by the activities of a small group of transcriptional regulators, the floral organ identity factors. Extensive genetic and molecular analyses have shown that these proteins act as master regulators of flower development, and function not only in organ identity determination but also during organ morphogenesis. Although it is now well established that these transcription factors act in higher order protein complexes in the regulation of transcription, the gene expression programmes controlled by them have remained largely elusive. Only recently, detailed insights into their functions have been obtained through the combination of a wide range of experimental methods, including transcriptomic and proteomic approaches. Here, we review the progress that has been made in the characterization of the floral organ identity factors from the main model plant Arabidopsis thaliana, and we discuss what is known about the processes acting downstream of these regulators. We further outline open questions, which we believe need to be addressed to obtain a more complete view of the molecular processes that govern floral organ development and specification.

Gene networks controlling the initiation of flower development.

The onset of flower formation is a key regulatory event during the life cycle of angiosperm plants, which marks the beginning of the reproductive phase of development. It has been shown that floral initiation is under tight genetic control, and deciphering the underlying molecular mechanisms has been a main area of interest in plant biology for the past two decades. Here, we provide an overview of the developmental and genetic processes that occur during floral initiation. We further review recent studies that have led to the genome-wide identification of target genes of key floral regulators and discuss how they have contributed to an in-depth understanding of the gene regulatory networks controlling early flower development. We focus especially on a master regulator of floral initiation in Arabidopsis thaliana APETALA1 (AP1), but also outline what is known about the AP1 network in other plant species and the evolutionary implications.

Repression of AGAMOUS-LIKE 24 is a crucial step in promoting flower development.

Flower development begins as floral meristems arise in succession on the flank of the inflorescence meristem. Floral meristem identity genes LEAFY (LFY) and APETALA1 (AP1) promote establishment and maintenance of floral identity in newly formed floral primordia. Without their activity, the floral primordia develop with inflorescence characteristics. The underlying molecular-genetic mechanism is unknown. Here we show that these phenotypes are due in large part to the ectopic expression of AGAMOUS-LIKE 24 (AGL24), a central regulator of floral meristem identity. We present evidence that AGL24 is an early target of transcriptional repression by LFY and AP1. Without such repression, continued AGL24 expression in floral meristems is sufficient to cause floral reversion regardless of the activation of floral organ identity genes. This indicates that LFY and AP1 promote floral development not only by positively regulating genes activated in flower development, but also by repressing AGL24, a promoter of inflorescence fate.

Floral Homeotic Factors: A Question of Specificity.

MADS-domain transcription factors are involved in the control of a multitude of processes in eukaryotes, and in plants, they play particularly important roles during reproductive development. Among the members of this large family of regulatory proteins are the floral organ identity factors, which specify the identities of the different types of floral organs in a combinatorial manner. Much has been learned over the past three decades about the function of these master regulators. For example, it has been shown that they have similar DNA-binding activities and that their genome-wide binding patterns exhibit large overlaps. At the same time, it appears that only a minority of binding events lead to changes in gene expression and that the different floral organ identity factors have distinct sets of target genes. Thus, binding of these transcription factors to the promoters of target genes alone may not be sufficient for their regulation. How these master regulators achieve specificity in a developmental context is currently not well understood. Here, we review what is known about their activities and highlight open questions that need to be addressed to gain more detailed insights into the molecular mechanisms underlying their functions. We discuss evidence for the involvement of cofactors as well as the results from studies on transcription factors in animals that may be instructive for a better understanding of how the floral organ identity factors achieve regulatory specificity.

Floral Induction Systems for the Study of Arabidopsis Flower Development.

Assessing the molecular changes that occur over the course of flower development is hampered by difficulties in isolating sufficient amounts of floral tissue at specific developmental stages. This is especially problematic when investigating molecular events at early stages of Arabidopsis flower development, as floral buds are minute and are initiated sequentially so that a single flower on an inflorescence is at a given developmental stage. Moreover, young floral buds are hidden by older flowers, which presents an additional challenge for dissection. To circumvent these issues, floral induction systems that allow the simultaneous induction of a large number of flowers on the inflorescence of a single plant were developed. To allow the plant community to avail of the full benefits of these systems, we address some common problems that can be encountered when growing these plants and collecting floral buds for analysis.

Transcriptional analysis in multiple barley varieties identifies signatures of waterlogging response.

Waterlogging leads to major crop losses globally, particularly for waterlogging-sensitive crops such as barley. Waterlogging reduces oxygen availability and results in additional stresses, leading to the activation of hypoxia and stress response pathways that promote plant survival. Although certain barley varieties have been shown to be more tolerant to waterlogging than others and some tolerance-related quantitative trait loci have been identified, the molecular mechanisms underlying this trait are mostly unknown. Transcriptomics approaches can provide very valuable information for our understanding of waterlogging tolerance. Here, we surveyed 21 barley varieties for the differential transcriptional activation of conserved hypoxia-response genes under waterlogging and selected five varieties with different levels of induction of core hypoxia-response genes. We further characterized their phenotypic response to waterlogging in terms of shoot and root traits. RNA sequencing to evaluate the genome-wide transcriptional responses to waterlogging of these selected varieties led to the identification of a set of 98 waterlogging-response genes common to the different datasets. Many of these genes are orthologs of the so-called "core hypoxia response genes," thus highlighting the conservation of plant responses to waterlogging. Hierarchical clustering analysis also identified groups of genes with intrinsic differential expression between varieties prior to waterlogging stress. These genes could constitute interesting candidates to study "predisposition" to waterlogging tolerance or sensitivity in barley.

One pattern analysis (OPA) for the quantitative determination of protein interactions in plant cells.

BACKGROUND: A commonly used approach to study the interaction of two proteins of interest (POIs) in vivo is measuring Förster Resonance Energy Transfer (FRET). This requires the expression of the two POIs fused to two fluorescent proteins that function as a FRET pair. A precise way to record FRET is Fluorescence Lifetime IMaging (FLIM) which generates quantitative data that, in principle, can be used to resolve both complex structure and protein affinities. However, this potential resolution is often lost in many experimental approaches. Here we introduce a novel tool for FLIM data analysis of multiexponential decaying donor fluorophores, one pattern analysis (OPA), which allows to obtain information about protein affinity and complex arrangement by extracting the relative amplitude of the FRET component and the FRET transfer efficiency from other FRET parameters. RESULTS: As a proof of concept for OPA, we used FLIM-FRET, or FLIM-FRET in combination with BiFC to reassess the dimerization and tetramerization properties of known interacting MADS-domain transcription factors in Nicotiana benthamiana leaf cells and Arabidopsis thaliana flowers. Using the OPA tool and by extracting protein BINDING efficiencies from FRET parameters to dissect MADS-domain protein interactions in vivo in transient N. benthamiana experiments, we could show that MADS-domain proteins display similar proximities within dimeric or tetrameric complexes but bind with variable affinities. By combining FLIM with BiFC, we were able to identify SEPALLATA3 as a mediator for tetramerization between the other MADS-domain factors. OPA also revealed that in vivo expression from native promoters at low levels in Arabidopsis flower meristems, makes in situ complex formation of MADS-domain proteins barely detectable. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that MADS-domain protein interactions are transient in situ and may involve additional, so far unknown interaction mediators. We conclude that OPA can be used to separate protein binding from information about proximity and orientation of the interacting proteins in their complexes. Visualization of individual protein interactions within the underlying interaction networks in the native environment is still restrained if expression levels are low and will require continuous improvements in fluorophore labelling, instrumentation set-ups and analysis tools.

The N-end rule pathway controls multiple functions during Arabidopsis shoot and leaf development.

The ubiquitin-dependent N-end rule pathway relates the in vivo half-life of a protein to the identity of its N-terminal residue. This proteolytic system is present in all organisms examined and has been shown to have a multitude of functions in animals and fungi. In plants, however, the functional understanding of the N-end rule pathway is only beginning. The N-end rule has a hierarchic structure. Destabilizing activity of N-terminal Asp, Glu, and (oxidized) Cys requires their conjugation to Arg by an arginyl-tRNA-protein transferase (R-transferase). The resulting N-terminal Arg is recognized by the pathway's E3 ubiquitin ligases, called "N-recognins." Here, we show that the Arabidopsis R-transferases AtATE1 and AtATE2 regulate various aspects of leaf and shoot development. We also show that the previously identified N-recognin PROTEOLYSIS6 (PRT6) mediates these R-transferase-dependent activities. We further demonstrate that the arginylation branch of the N-end rule pathway plays a role in repressing the meristem-promoting BREVIPEDICELLUS (BP) gene in developing leaves. BP expression is known to be excluded from Arabidopsis leaves by the activities of the ASYMMETRIC LEAVES1 (AS1) transcription factor complex and the phytohormone auxin. Our results suggest that AtATE1 and AtATE2 act redundantly with AS1, but independently of auxin, in the control of leaf development.