4.5 Article

Promoters of orthologous Glycine max and Lotus japonicus nodulation autoregulation genes interchangeably drive phloem-specific expression in transgenic plants

期刊

MOLECULAR PLANT-MICROBE INTERACTIONS
卷 20, 期 7, 页码 769-780

出版社

AMER PHYTOPATHOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1094/MPMI-20-7-0769

关键词

NRR; promoter deletion; supernodulation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The nodule autoregulation receptor kinase (GmNARK) of soybeari (Glycine max) is essential for the systemic autoregulation of nodulation. Based on quantitative reversetranscriptase polymerase chain reaction, GmNARK is expressed to varying levels throughout the plant; the transcript was detected at high levels in mature leaves and roots but to a lesser extent in young leaves, shoot tips, and nodules. The transcript level was not significantly affected by Bradyrhizobium japonicum during the first week following inoculation. In addition, the activities of the promoters of GmIVARK and Lotus japonicus HAR1, driving a beta-glucuronidase (GUSPlus) reporter gene, were examined in stably transformed L. japonicus and transgenic hairy roots of soybean. Histochemical GUS activity in L. japonicus plants carrying either a 1.7-kb GmNARKpr::GUS or 2.0-kb LjHAR1pr::GUS construct was clearly localized to living cells within vascular bundles, especially phloem cells in leaves, stems, roots, and nodules. Phloem-specific expression also was detected in soybean hairy roots carrying these constructs. Our study suggests that regulatory elements required for the transcription of these orthologous genes are conserved. Moreover, rapid amplification of 5' cDNA ends (5' rapid amplification of cDNA ends) revealed two major transcripts of GmNARK potentially originating from two TATA boxes. Further analysis of the GmNARK promoter has confirmed that these two TATA boxes are functional. Deletion analysis also located a region controlling phloem-specific expression to a DNA sequence between 908 bp and 1.7 kb upstream of the translation start site of GmNARK.

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

4.5
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