4.7 Article

Effects of gibberellin treatment during flowering induction period on global gene expression and the transcription of flowering-control genes in Citrus buds

期刊

PLANT SCIENCE
卷 198, 期 -, 页码 46-57

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.plantsci.2012.09.012

关键词

Bud; Citrus; Flowering; FT; GibberellinI; Global gene expression

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gibberellins (GAS) affect flowering in a species-dependent manner: in long-day and biennial plants they promote flowering, whereas in other plants, including fruit trees, they inhibit it. The mechanism by which GAs promote flowering in Arabidopsis is not fully understood, although there is increasing evidence that they may act through more than one pathway. In citrus, GA treatment during the flowering induction period reduces the number of flowers; the mechanism of flowering inhibition is not clear; the hormone may act directly in the bud to determine its fate toward vegetative growth, generate a mobile signal, or both. However, bud metabolic and regulatory pathways are expected to be altered upon GA treatment. We investigated the effect of GA treatments on global gene expression in the bud during the induction period, and on the expression of key flowering genes. Overall, about 2000 unigenes showed altered expression, with about 300 showing at least a two-fold change. Changes in flavonoids and trehalose metabolic pathways were validated, and among other altered pathways, such as cell-wall components, were discussed in light of GA's inhibition of flowering. Among flowering-control genes, GA treatment resulted in reduced mRNA levels of FT, AM and a few flower-organ-identity genes. mRNA levels of FLC-like and SOC1 were not altered by the treatment, whereas LEAFY mRNA was induced in GA-treated buds. Surprisingly, FT expression was higher in buds than leaves. Overall, our results shed light on changes taking place in the bud during flowering induction in response to GA treatment. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

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