4.7 Article

A library of Arabidopsis 35S-cDNA lines for identifying novel mutants

期刊

PLANT MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
卷 46, 期 6, 页码 695-703

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1023/A:1011699722052

关键词

35SpBARN; activation tagging; co-suppression; ferredoxin-NADP(+) reductase; over-expression; petH

资金

  1. NIGMS NIH HHS [T32 GM08362, R29 GM054749-04, R29 GM054749-05, R29 GM54749] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We have developed a system to over-express or co-suppress random cDNAs in Arabidopsis thaliana upon Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated transformation. We constructed a binary vector containing a novel Arabidopsis cDNA library driven by the cauliflower mosaic virus (CaMV) 35S promoter. The vector, 35SpBARN, offers in terra selection with glufosinate ammonium (BASTA) and the ability to identify the cDNA insert using PCR with flanking primers. We introduced this overexpression library into Arabidopsis and selected over 30 000 transformants. A random sample of 50 T-1 plants was analyzed to determine the quality of the cDNA library in planta. About 90% of T-1 plants in the collection have inserts, the average insert size is ca. 1.1 kb, and ca. 43% of these inserts appear to encode full-length proteins. T-1 plants were screened for visible abnormalities, and one mutant, V5, was chosen for further study. This mutant displays a pale green phenotype, and its transgene contains a partial petH cDNA encoding chloroplast ferredoxin-NADP(+) reductase (EC 1.18.1.2). This construct co-suppresses the endogenous petH transcript. We recapitulated the mutant phenotype by expressing either the full-length or truncated petH cDNA from the CaMV 35S promoter in wild-type Arabidopsis. Our results indicate that co-suppressing endogenous genes can cause dominant phenotypes as expected. As we have also used the 35SpBARN vector to successfully over-express other transcripts in planta, we predict that this system will be generally useful for identifying genes that yield phenotypes upon over-expression as well.

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