4.7 Article

Identification and characterization of OsEBS, a gene involved in enhanced plant biomass and spikelet number in rice

期刊

PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY JOURNAL
卷 11, 期 9, 页码 1044-1057

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/pbi.12097

关键词

biomass; spikelet number; OsEBS; map-based cloning; cell number; common wild rice (Oryza rufipogon Griff.)

资金

  1. Genetically Modified Organisms Breeding Major Projects [2013ZX08001004-009]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30900881]
  3. Shanghai Natural Science Foundation [13ZR1402800]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Common wild rice (Oryza rufipogon Griff.) is an important genetic reservoir for rice improvement. We investigated a quantitative trait locus (QTL), qGP5-1, which is related to plant height, leaf size and panicle architecture, using a set of introgression lines of O. rufipogon in the background of the Indica cultivar Guichao2 (Oryza sativa L.). We cloned and characterized qGP5-1 and confirmed that the newly identified gene OsEBS (enhancing biomass and spikelet number) increased plant height, leaf size and spikelet number per panicle, leading to an increase in total grain yield per plant. Our results showed that the increased size of vegetative organs in OsEBS-expressed plants was enormously caused by increasing cell number. Sequence alignment showed that OsEBS protein contains a region with high similarity to the N-terminal conserved ATPase domain of Hsp70, but it lacks the C-terminal regions of the peptide-binding domain and the C-terminal lid. More results indicated that OsEBS gene did not have typical characteristics of Hsp70 in this study. Furthermore, Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) transformed with OsEBS showed a similar phenotype to OsEBS-transgenic rice, indicating a conserved function of OsEBS among plant species. Together, we report the cloning and characterization of OsEBS, a new QTL that controls rice biomass and spikelet number, through map-based cloning, and it may have utility in improving grain yield in rice.

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