4.8 Article

Regulation of seed size by hypomethylation of maternal and paternal genomes

期刊

PLANT PHYSIOLOGY
卷 142, 期 3, 页码 1160-1168

出版社

AMER SOC PLANT BIOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.1104/pp.106.088849

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [GM069415] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

DNA methylation is an epigenetic modification of cytosine that is important for silencing gene transcription and transposons, gene imprinting, development, and seed viability. DNA METHYLTRANSFERASE1 (MET1) is the primary maintenance DNA methyltransferase in Arabidopsis ( Arabidopsis thaliana). Reciprocal crosses between antisense MET1 transgenic and wild-type plants show that DNA hypomethylation has a parent-of-origin effect on seed size. However, due to the dominant nature of the antisense MET1 transgene, the parent with a hypomethylated genome, its gametophyte, and both the maternal and paternal genomes of the F-1 seed become hypomethylated. Thus, the distinct role played by hypomethylation at each generation is not known. To address this issue, we examined F-1 seed from reciprocal crosses using a loss-of-function recessive null allele, met1-6. Crosses between wild-type and homozygous met1-6 parents show that hypomethylated maternal and paternal genomes result in significantly larger and smaller F-1 seeds, respectively. Our analysis of crosses between wild-type and heterozygous MET1/met1-6 parents revealed that hypomethylation in the female or male gametophytic generation was sufficient to influence F-1 seed size. A recessive mutation in another gene that dramatically reduces DNA methylation, DECREASE IN DNA METHYLATION1, also causes parent-of-origin effects on F-1 seed size. By contrast, recessive mutations in genes that regulate a smaller subset of DNA methylation (CHROMOMETHYLASE3 and DOMAINS REARRANGED METHYLTRANSFERASES1 and 2) had little effect on seed size. Collectively, these results show that maternal and paternal genomes play distinct roles in the regulation of seed size in Arabidopsis.

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

4.8
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