4.7 Article

An ancestral stomatal patterning module revealed in the non-vascular land plant Physcomitrella patens

期刊

DEVELOPMENT
卷 143, 期 18, 页码 3306-3314

出版社

COMPANY BIOLOGISTS LTD
DOI: 10.1242/dev.135038

关键词

Stomata; Evolution; Patterning; Peptide signalling

资金

  1. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/J001805]
  2. European Research Council [CDREG] [32998]
  3. Natural Environment Research Council PhD studentship
  4. BBSRC [BB/I002154/1, BB/J001805/1, BB/I006710/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  5. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/I006710/1, BB/I002154/1, BB/J001805/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  6. Natural Environment Research Council [1241768] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The patterning of stomata plays a vital role in plant development and has emerged as a paradigm for the role of peptide signals in the spatial control of cellular differentiation. Research in Arabidopsis has identified a series of epidermal patterning factors (EPFs), which interact with an array of membrane-localised receptors and associated proteins (encoded by ERECTA and TMM genes) to control stomatal density and distribution. However, although it is well-established that stomata arose very early in the evolution of land plants, until now it has been unclear whether the established angiosperm stomatal patterning system represented by the EPF/ TMM/ERECTA module reflects a conserved, universal mechanism in the plant kingdom. Here, we use molecular genetics to show that the moss Physcomitrella patens has conserved homologues of angiosperm EPF, TMM and at least one ERECTA gene that function together to permit the correct patterning of stomata and that, moreover, elements of the module retain function when transferred to Arabidopsis. Our data characterise the stomatal patterning system in an evolutionarily distinct branch of plants and support the hypothesis that the EPF/TMM/ERECTA module represents an ancient patterning system.

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