4.8 Article

CHIMERIC FLORAL ORGANS1, Encoding a Monocot-Specific MADS Box Protein, Regulates Floral Organ Identity in Rice

Journal

PLANT PHYSIOLOGY
Volume 160, Issue 2, Pages 788-807

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1104/pp.112.200980

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. 863 Program of China [2006AA10Z167, 2011AA10A100]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30700451, 31271304]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [XDJK2012A001]
  4. Excellent Youth Foundation of the Chongqing Scientific Committee [2008BA1033]
  5. Chongqing Major Scientific and Technological Research Project [2010AA1013]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The control of floral organ identity by homeotic MADS box genes is well established in eudicots. However, grasses have highly specialized outer floral organs, and the identities of the genes that regulate the highly specialized outer floral organs of grasses remain unclear. In this study, we characterized a MIKC-type MADS box gene, CHIMERIC FLORAL ORGANS (CFO1), which plays a key role in the regulation of floral organ identity in rice (Oryza sativa). The cfo1 mutant displayed defective marginal regions of the palea, chimeric floral organs, and ectopic floral organs. Map-based cloning demonstrated that CFO1 encoded the OsMADS32 protein. Phylogenetic analysis revealed that CFO1/OsMADS32 belonged to a monocot-specific clade in the MIKC-type MADS box gene family. The expression domains of CFO1 were mainly restricted to the marginal region of the palea and inner floral organs. The floral organ identity gene DROOPING LEAF (DL) was expressed ectopically in all defective organs of cfo1 flowers. Double mutant analysis revealed that loss of DL function mitigated some of the defects of floral organs in cfo1 flowers. We propose that the CFO1 gene plays a pivotal role in maintaining floral organ identity through negative regulation of DL expression.

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