4.7 Article

Nicotiana tabacum EIL2 directly regulates expression of at least one tobacco gene induced by sulphur starvation

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL BOTANY
卷 61, 期 3, 页码 889-900

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jxb/erp356

关键词

EIL family; promoter; reporter gene; sulphur deficit; sulphur metabolism; tobacco; transcription factor; yeast one-hybrid

资金

  1. Ministry of Science and Higher Education [1194/B/P01/2008/35]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sulphur deficiency severely affects plant growth and their agricultural productivity leading to diverse changes in development and metabolisms. Molecular mechanisms regulating gene expression under low sulphur conditions remain largely unknown. AtSLIM1, a member of the EIN3-like (EIL) family was reported to be a central transcriptional regulator of the plant sulphur response, however, no direct interaction of this protein with any sulphur-responsive promoters was demonstrated. The focus of this study was on the analysis of a promoter region of UP9C, a tobacco gene strongly induced by sulphur limitation. Cloning and subsequent examination of this promoter resulted in the identification of a 20-nt sequence (UPE-box), also present in the promoters of several Arabidopsis genes, including three out of four homologues of UP9C. The UPE-box, consisting of two parallel tebs sequences (TEIL binding site), proved to be necessary to bind the transcription factors belonging to the EIL family and of a 5-nt conserved sequence at the 3'-end. The yeast one-hybrid analysis resulted in the identification of one transcription factor (NtEIL2) capable of binding to the UPE-box. The interactions of NtEIL2, and its homologue from Arabidopsis, AtSLIM1, with DNA were affected by mutations within the UPE-box. Transient expression assays in Nicotiana benthamiana have further shown that both factors, NtEIL2 and AtSLIM1, activate the UP9C promoter. Interestingly, activation by NtEIL2, but not by AtSLIM1, was dependent on the sulphur-deficiency of the plants.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据