4.8 Article

GhMYB25-like: a key factor in early cotton fibre development

Journal

PLANT JOURNAL
Volume 65, Issue 5, Pages 785-797

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2010.04464.x

Keywords

cotton fibre; Gossypium hirsutum; MYB; transcription factors; transgenic; trichomes

Categories

Funding

  1. Australian Cotton Research and Development Corporation
  2. Cotton Breeding Australia Joint Venture

Ask authors/readers for more resources

P>MYB transcription factors have been implicated in regulation of the development of ovule epidermal cells into the elongated seed fibres of cotton. An R2R3 MYB, GhMYB25-like, identified from its reduced expression in a fibreless mutant of cotton (Xu142 fl), is here shown to play a key role in the very early stages of fibre cell differentiation. A GhMYB25-like promoter-GUS construct was expressed predominantly in the epidermal layers of cotton ovules before anthesis (-3 days post-anthesis, dpa), increasing in expression in 0-dpa ovules, primarily in those epidermal cells expanding into fibres, and then in elongating fibres at +3 dpa, declining thereafter. This was consistent with GhMYB25-like transcript abundance during fibre development. RNA interference suppression of GhMYB25-like resulted in cotton plants with fibreless seeds, but normal trichomes elsewhere, phenocopying the Xu142 fl mutant. Like Xu142 fl these plants had reduced expression of the fibre-expressed MYBs, GhMYB25 and GhMYB109, indicating that GhMYB25-like is upstream from those MYBs. This hierarchy was supported by the absence of any change in transcript level of GhMYB25-like in GhMYB25- and GhMYB109-silenced transgenic lines. Transgenic cotton with an additional copy of the native gene had elevated expression of GhMYB25-like in ovules, but no obvious increase in fibre initials, suggesting that there may be other factors that interact with GhMYB25-like to differentiate epidermal cells into fibre cells.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available