4.7 Article

GIGANTEA and EARLY FLOWERING 4 in Arabidopsis Exhibit Differential Phase-Specific Genetic Influences over a Diurnal Cycle

期刊

MOLECULAR PLANT
卷 5, 期 3, 页码 678-687

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/mp/sss005

关键词

microarray; LHY; endogenous clock; GI; ELF4

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF)
  2. Korea government (MEST) [20100020417]
  3. National Core Research Center [2009-0091504]
  4. World Class University [R31-2008-000-10105-0]
  5. National Institute of Health [R01GM093285]
  6. National Research Foundation of Korea [2010-0020417] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The endogenous circadian clock regulates many physiological processes related to plant survival and adaptability. GIGANTEA (GI), a clock-associated protein, contributes to the maintenance of circadian period length and amplitude, and also regulates flowering time and hypocotyl growth in response to day length. Similarly, EARLY FLOWERING 4 (ELF4), another clock regulator, also contributes to these processes. However, little is known about either the genetic or molecular interactions between Gland ELF4 in Arabidopsis. In this study, we investigated the genetic interactions between Gland ELF4 in the regulation of circadian clock-controlled outputs. Our mutant analysis shows that GI is epistatic to ELF4 in flowering time determination, while ELF4 is epistatic to GI in hypocotyl growth regulation. Moreover, GI and ELF4 have a synergistic or additive effect on endogenous clock regulation. Gene expression profiling of gi, elf4, and gi elf4 mutants further established that Gland ELF4 have differentially dominant influences on circadian physiological outputs at dusk and dawn, respectively. This phasing of Gland ELF4 influences provides a potential means to achieve diversity in the regulation of circadian physiological outputs, including flowering time and hypocotyl growth.

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