4.7 Article

Pollen grain development is compromised in Arabidopsis agp6 agp11 null mutants

期刊

JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL BOTANY
卷 60, 期 11, 页码 3133-3142

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jxb/erp148

关键词

Arabidopsis; arabinogalactan proteins; knockouts; pollen development

资金

  1. FCT (Fundacao para a Ciencia e Tecnologia, Portugal) [PTDC/AGR-GPL/67971/2006]
  2. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [PTDC/AGR-GPL/67971/2006] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Arabinogalactan proteins (AGPs) are structurally complex plasma membrane and cell wall proteoglycans that are implicated in diverse developmental processes, including plant sexual reproduction. Male gametogenesis (pollen grain development) is fundamental to plant sexual reproduction. The role of two abundant, pollen-specific AGPs, AGP6, and AGP11, have been investigated here. The pollen specificity of these proteoglycans suggested that they are integral to pollen biogenesis and their strong sequence homology indicated a potential for overlapping function. Indeed, single gene transposon insertion knockouts for both AGPs showed no discernible phenotype. However, in plants homozygous for one of the insertions and heterozygous for the other, in homozygous double mutants, and in RNAi and amiRNA transgenic plants that were down-regulated for both genes, many pollen grains failed to develop normally, leading to their collapse. The microscopic observations of these aborted pollen grains showed a condensed cytoplasm, membrane blebbing and the presence of small lytic vacuoles. Later in development, the generative cells that arise from mitotic divisions were not seen to go into the second mitosis. Anther wall development, the establishment of the endothecium thickenings, the opening of the stomium, and the deposition of the pollen coat were all normal in the knockout and knockdown lines. Our data provide strong evidence that these two proteoglycans have overlapping and important functions in gametophytic pollen grain development.

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