4.3 Article

The CArG-Box Located Upstream from the Transcriptional Start of Wheat Vernalization Gene VRN1 Is Not Necessary for the Vernalization Response

期刊

JOURNAL OF HEREDITY
卷 100, 期 3, 页码 355-364

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/jhered/esp002

关键词

CArG-box; flowering; regulatory regions; Triticum monococcum; vernalization; wheat

资金

  1. United States Department of Agriculture Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Services [2007-35301-17737, 2007-35301-18188]
  2. Argentine Agencia Nacional de Promocion Cientifica y Tecnologica'' [BID 1728/OC AR PICT 13442]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In diploid wheat (Triticum monococcum), and likely in other Triticeae species, the VRN1 gene is essential for the initiation of the reproductive phase, and therefore, a detailed characterization of its regulatory regions is required to understand this process. A CArG-box (MADS-box-binding site) identified in the VRN1 promoter upstream from the transcription initiation site has been proposed as a critical regulatory element for the vernalization response. This hypothesis was supported by the genetic linkage between CArG-box natural deletions and dominant Vrn1 alleles for spring growth habit and by physical interactions with VRT2, a MADS-box protein proposed as a putative flowering repressor regulated by vernalization. Here, we describe a T. monococcum accession with a strong vernalization requirement and a 48-bp deletion encompassing the CArG-box in the VRN1 promoter. Genetic analyses of 2 segregating populations confirmed that this VRN1 allele is completely linked with a strong winter growth habit (vrn-A(m)1b). Transcript levels of the VRN1 allele with the 48-bp deletion were very low in unvernalized plants and increased during vernalization to levels similar to those detected in other wild-type vrn-A(m)1 alleles. Taken together, these results indicate that the CArG-box found upstream of the VRN1 transcription initiation site is not essential for the vernalization response.

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

4.3
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