![]() | ![]() |
Formats:
|
||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2007, American Society of Plant Biologists MIKC* MADS-Protein Complexes Bind Motifs Enriched in the Proximal Region of Late Pollen-Specific Arabidopsis Promoters[W] Department of Molecular Plant Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research, D–50829 Cologne, Germany *Corresponding author; e-mail verelst/at/mpiz-koeln.mpg.de; fax 49–221–5062–113. Received September 26, 2006; Accepted October 25, 2006. This article has been cited by other articles in PMC.Abstract The genome of Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) encodes over 100 MADS-domain transcription factors, categorized into five phylogenetic subgroups. Most research efforts have focused on just one of these subgroups (MIKCc), whereas the other four remain largely unexplored. Here, we report on five members of the so-called Mδ or Arabidopsis MIKC* (AtMIKC*) subgroup, which are predominantly expressed during the late stages of pollen development. Very few MADS-box genes function in mature pollen, and from this perspective, the AtMIKC* genes are therefore highly exceptional. We found that the AtMIKC* proteins are able to form multiple heterodimeric complexes in planta, and that these protein complexes exhibit a for the MADS-family unusual and high DNA binding specificity in vitro. Compared to their occurrence in promoters genome wide, AtMIKC* binding sites are strongly overrepresented in the proximal region of late pollen-specific promoters. By combining our experimental data with in silico genomics and pollen transcriptomics approaches, we identified a considerable number of putative direct target genes of the AtMIKC* transcription factor complexes in pollen, many of which have known or proposed functions in pollen tube growth. The expression of several of these predicted targets is altered in mutant pollen in which all AtMIKC* complexes are affected, and in vitro germination of this mutant pollen is severely impaired. Our data therefore suggest that the AtMIKC* protein complexes play an essential role in transcriptional regulation during late pollen development. MADS-domain transcription factors play key roles in the development of higher eukaryotes. Their characteristic feature is the N-terminal MADS-domain, which is responsible for DNA binding and is highly conserved among fungi, animals, and plants. As homo- or heterodimeric complexes, and in some cases as higher-order complexes, MADS-proteins regulate gene expression by binding to CArG-box motifs in promoter regions (Egea-Cortines et al., 1999; Honma and Goto, 2001; Theissen and Saedler, 2001). The so-called serum response element (SRE)-type CArG-box, CC(A/T)6GG, is the DNA motif preferred by most MADS-protein complexes investigated to date (Hayes et al., 1988; Riechmann et al., 1996; de Folter and Angenent, 2006). However, some MADS-protein complexes, such as mammalian myocyte enhancer factor-2A, preferentially bind the related MEF2- or N10-type CArG-box. This motif has as general consensus C(A/T)8G but is usually more strictly defined as CTA(A/T)4TAG (Pollock and Treisman, 1991; Shore and Sharrocks, 1995). The embryo-specific AGAMOUS-LIKE 15 (AGL15) protein from Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) and SQUAMOSA from Antirrhinum majus both have a broader spectrum of binding sites, recognizing SRE-, MEF2-, and intermediate motifs (West et al., 1998; Tang and Perry, 2003). In spite of the rather common occurrence of CArG-boxes in promoters, MADS-protein complexes are quite specific in recognizing their target promoters. Although different homodimeric MADS-protein complexes have been crystallized together with their preferred binding motif (e.g. Santelli and Richmond, 2000), the structural basis of these differences in binding specificity is still not fully understood. In contrast to the situation in animals and fungi, the MADS-family has undergone a spectacular expansion during the evolution of plants. An initial expansion is already apparent in gymnosperms (Theissen et al., 2000; Becker and Theissen, 2003; De Bodt et al., 2003), but in angiosperms it is far more pronounced (see, e.g., Martinez-Castilla and Alvarez-Buylla, 2003; Nam et al., 2004; Irish and Litt, 2005; Shiu et al., 2005). The genomes of Arabidopsis and Oryza sativa encode 107 and 71 putatively functional MADS-proteins, respectively (Pařenicová et al., 2003; Nam et al., 2004), compared to only four in yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae), five in Homo sapiens, two in both Drosophila melanogaster and Caenorhabditis elegans, one in the alga Chlamydomonas reinhardtii, 18 in the moss Physcomitrella patens, and at least 19 in Gnetum gnemon (Becker et al., 2000; Nam et al., 2003; Shiu et al., 2005; Tanabe et al., 2005; D. Liebsch and T. Münster, unpublished data). MADS-proteins are therefore expected to play specialized roles in higher plant development, and several members have indeed been associated with seed plant-specific developmental programs (Theissen et al., 2000). The best-studied examples are the classical MIKC MADS-box genes (MIKCc; nomenclature according to Henschel et al., 2002) involved in floral organ patterning, flowering time, and ovule and fruit development (for review, see Theissen et al., 2000; Ng and Yanofsky, 2001). Two major monophyletic lineages have been defined within the Arabidopsis MADS-family (Alvarez-Buylla et al., 2000b). Type I genes consist of one or two exons, while type II genes always have more than five exons. The genes from both lineages encode proteins that share the MADS-domain as common feature, but in type II proteins, three additional domains are present, namely the I-, K-, and C-domains (Münster et al., 1997). The former two domains mediate protein-protein interactions (dimerization), whereas the C-terminal domain functions in transcriptional activation and in the formation of higher-order protein complexes (Ma et al., 1991; Shore and Sharrocks, 1995). Pařenicová and co-workers (2003) further classified the Arabidopsis MADS-family and identified a total of five subgroups: three belonging to the type I lineage (the Mα, Mβ, and Mγ subgroups) and two within the type II lineage (the MIKCc and Mδ subgroups). The Mδ subgroup consists of only six genes in Arabidopsis, compared to around 40 genes in the MIKCc subgroup. An exceptionally complex intron-exon structure and the lack of a clearly identifiable K-domain are the most striking differences between the Mδ and MIKCc genes (Kofuji et al., 2003; Martinez-Castilla and Alvarez-Buylla, 2003; Nam et al., 2004). The Arabidopsis Mδ genes are highly homologous to the MIKC* genes from the moss P. patens (Kofuji et al., 2003). The MIKC* genes in moss distinguish themselves from classical type II genes because of their longer I-domain, which is encoded by four or five exons, whereas the shorter I-domain of MIKCc proteins is encoded by a single exon (Henschel et al., 2002; Riese et al., 2005). The Arabidopsis Mδ genes also meet these criteria (Kofuji et al., 2003), and therefore we refer to them as Arabidopsis MIKC* genes (AtMIKC*). They have evolved independently from the MIKCc subgroup for the last 450 million years. Within the AtMIKC* subgroup, the AGL66, AGL104, and AGL67 genes form one monophyletic lineage, and AGL30, AGL65, and AGL94 a second one (Kofuji et al., 2003). These two lineages have previously been named S and P, respectively (Nam et al., 2004). While the AGL67 gene is expressed in embryos and is a candidate for regulating aspects of late embryo development (de Folter et al., 2004), the five other AtMIKC* genes (AGL30, AGL65, AGL66, AGL94, and AGL104) are almost exclusively expressed in pollen (Kofuji et al., 2003; Honys and Twell, 2004). Pollen development can be divided into four stages (uninuclear microspore, bicellular pollen [BCP], tricellular pollen [TCP], and mature pollen [MPG]; Honys and Twell, 2004; McCormick, 2004), and the AtMIKC* genes are predominantly expressed from the tricellular stage onwards, after the second mitotic division (Honys and Twell, 2004; Supplemental Table S1). Intriguingly, while the MADS-family is altogether underrepresented in the pollen transcriptome (Honys and Twell, 2004), the nonclassical lineages (type I and especially AtMIKC*) are in fact overrepresented in pollen (Pina et al., 2005). The only strongly pollen-expressed MIKCc gene is AGL18 (Kofuji et al., 2003; Alvarez-Buylla et al., 2000a). The coexpression of five of the six AtMIKC* genes during late stages of pollen development suggests that they might constitute a transcription factor network in mature pollen. This assumption is strengthened by the preliminary observation that AGL65 interacts with both AGL66 and AGL104 in yeast (de Folter et al., 2005). Functional characterization of the AtMIKC* genes might therefore provide new insights in the unique transcriptome of mature pollen grains, which several recent studies found to be very different from that of other plant tissues (Becker et al., 2003; Honys and Twell, 2003, 2004; Hennig et al., 2004; Pina et al., 2005). In a first attempt to functionally characterize the AtMIKC* proteins, we performed protein-interaction and DNA-binding studies for the five pollen-expressed members of this subgroup. We show that between members of the two monophyletic AtMIKC* lineages, five heterodimeric protein complexes can be formed, at least four of which exist in planta. They preferentially bind MEF2-type CArG-boxes in vitro, and these preferred binding motifs are strongly overrepresented in the proximal region of promoters that are activated during the last stages of pollen development, at the time of AtMIKC* expression. Our results suggest that the AtMIKC* protein complexes play an important role in the regulation of transcription during late pollen development, and this is confirmed by a preliminary functional analysis of mutant pollen in which all five AtMIKC* complexes are either absent or strongly reduced in abundance. RESULTS Cloning of AtMIKC* cDNAs from Pollen We cloned the full-length cDNAs of five AtMIKC* genes (AGL30, AGL65, AGL66, AGL94, and AGL104) from a cDNA pool obtained from mature Arabidopsis pollen grains, using gene-specific primers. AGL30 had previously been regarded a pseudogene based on the cloning of a truncated splice variant with a stop codon in the fifth exon (Kofuji et al., 2003). However, we amplified and cloned a splice form of AGL30 that consists of 10 exons, encoding a protein with much higher homology to AGL65 and AGL94. Our AGL30 sequence is identical to the recently created GenBank accession DQ446459. Protein alignments are shown in Supplemental Figure S1. AtMIKC* Proteins Form Specific Heterodimeric Complexes Given that MADS-proteins generally function in dimeric complexes, we tested the interactions between AGL30, AGL65, AGL66, AGL94, and AGL104 in the yeast two-hybrid (Y2H) system. All bait constructs showed autoactivation in yeast, which was abolished after deletion of a C-terminal fragment (ΔC), including suspected activation domains. Using these truncated bait constructs and full-length prey constructs, we found four reciprocally interacting pairs: AGL66 dimerizes with AGL30, AGL65, and AGL94, whereas AGL104 interacts only with AGL65. The interactions of AGL65 with AGL66 and with AGL104 in yeast was previously reported (de Folter et al., 2005). None of the AtMIKC* proteins is able to form a homodimer or to interact with AGL18, which is the only highly expressed MIKCc protein in pollen (Fig. 1A
To verify AtMIKC* protein interactions in planta, bimolecular fluorescence complementation (BiFC) was performed using the full-length open reading frame (ORF) sequences (Fig. 1B AtMIKC* Protein Complexes Preferentially Bind MEF2-Type CArG-Boxes in Vitro To test their ability to bind DNA, the five pollen-expressed AtMIKC* proteins were synthesized in vitro in a cell-free system and used in electrophoretic mobility shift assay (EMSA) experiments. The five protein combinations capable of physical interaction (namely AGL30/66, AGL65/66, AGL94/66, AGL30/104, and AGL65/104; Fig. 1E The AGL30/66 and AGL65/66 protein complexes, which exhibited the strongest DNA binding in this experiment, were chosen for a random binding site selection (RBSS) experiment to determine their preferred binding motifs. After five iterative rounds of RBSS, both complexes showed a very pronounced preference for the MEF2-type CArG-box with consensus CTA(A/T)4TAG (Fig. 2A
We corroborated our RBSS results with competitive EMSA experiments, confirming the strong preference of the AGL30/66 and AGL65/66 complexes for MEF2 motifs and in particular for the CTA(TTTT)TAG/CTA(AAAA)TAG motif (Fig. 3
MEF2 Motifs Are Specifically Overrepresented in Late Pollen-Specific Promoters The AtMIKC* genes are highest expressed during the tricellular and mature stages of pollen development (Honys and Twell, 2004; Supplemental Table S1). As a consequence, the AtMIKC* protein complexes are expected to regulate transcription during that period of pollen development. Within the MADS family, they are quite exceptional in this respect; apart from AGL18, AGL29, and a small number of low expressed type-I proteins (Kofuji et al., 2003; Pina et al., 2005), they are the only MADS-proteins that are expected to function in mature pollen. In combination with our knowledge of the DNA-binding behavior of the AtMIKC* complexes in vitro, this low background of other MADS-box genes in pollen enabled us to identify genes that are potentially under direct transcriptional regulation by the AtMIKC* complexes. Such genes are expected to contain a MEF2 motif in their promoter and to be either down- or up-regulated at the time of AtMIKC* gene expression, i.e. in the tricellular and/or mature stages of pollen development. To address this matter, we reanalyzed the pollen transcriptome dataset from Honys and Twell (2004) containing the expression levels of the 22,464 Arabidopsis genes represented on the ATH1 microarray chip (Affymetrix) in the four stages of pollen development and in seven other (nonpollen) tissues. We first selected all genes with a strongly pollen-specific expression (at least 5 times higher in one or more stages of pollen development than in any of the seven other tissues). Subsequently, we arbitrarily defined BCP-specific genes, whose expression is down-regulated at least 2-fold during the TCP stage, and TCP/MPG-specific genes, whose expression is up-regulated at least 2-fold during the TCP and/or MPG stages, relative to the BCP stage. Using these stringent criteria, we identified 314 BCP-specific and 663 TCP/MPG-specific genes (Supplemental Table S1). Because these selections were based on the ATH1 microarray chip, which covers only around 70% of the Arabidopsis genome, there are certainly more pollen-specific genes in Arabidopsis. Nevertheless, our selected gene lists can be regarded as highly representative for the entire pollen transcriptome. We verified the pollen specificity of these selected genes using Genevestigator (Zimmermann et al., 2004), which includes the pollen transcriptome dataset (mature pollen only) from the AtGenExpress developmental series (Schmid et al., 2005), which is completely independent from the dataset of Honys and Twell (2004). Most BCP-specific genes were confirmed as stamen specific, and nearly all TCP/MPG-specific genes were mature pollen specific (data not shown). Subsequently, we screened the 3-kb upstream regions of these genes for the presence of MEF2-type CArG-boxes, and found them in 31 BCP-specific and in 152 TCP/MPG-specific promoters (Fig. 2B Some MEF2 Motifs Occur More Frequently in Promoters Because AtMIKC* protein complexes are able to discriminate between the 16 different MEF2 motifs in vitro (Fig. 2A Next, we repeated this analysis with all BCP- and TCP/MPG-specific promoters and found that the relative occurrence of the 16 different MEF2 motifs in these promoters differs from that in all promoters genome wide. In particular, the CTA(TTTT)TAG/CTA(AAAA)TAG motif, which is the most preferred binding motif of the AtMIKC* complexes in vitro (Fig. 2A To allow comparison, we also screened all Arabidopsis 3-kb promoters for N9- and SRE-type CArG-boxes (Supplemental Table S2). The relative occurrence of the 64 possible SRE motifs is also nonrandom, with the CCTTTTTTGG/CCAAAAAAGG and CCATTTTTGG/CCAAAAATGG motifs accounting for over 8% of all SRE motifs in Arabidopsis promoter regions, while several other SRE motifs represent less than 1% of the total number. In BCP-specific, but not in TCP/MPG-specific, promoters, one particular motif (CCTTTTTTGG/CCAAAAAAGG) is strongly overrepresented (accounting for 17.5% of all SRE motifs in BCP-specific promoters and for only 8.1% in TCP/MPG-specific promoters and 8.9% in all Arabidopsis promoters; Supplemental Table S2), suggesting that it could be the preferred binding site for a non-AtMIKC* MADS-protein complex functioning during the BCP and/or TCP stage of pollen development. AGL18 would, again, be a good candidate for being part of such a complex, based on its expression profile throughout pollen development and the fact that the related AGL15 protein binds well to SRE motifs (Tang and Perry, 2003). Whether the AtMIKC* complexes preferentially bind one of the two complements of a nonpalindromic MEF2 motif or whether they bind both complements to the same extent is a question that remained unanswered after our RBSS experiments, which are essentially nondirectional in nature. Our in silico analyses showed that the two complements of nearly all MEF2 motifs occur equally often in all promoters genome wide (Fig. 2C MEF2 Motifs Are Enriched in the Proximal Region of TCP/MPG-Specific Promoters Since spatial positioning of cis-acting elements in a promoter is often an important factor in the regulation of gene expression, we investigated the spatial distribution of CArG-boxes in Arabidopsis 3-kb upstream regions. We found that MEF2, SRE, and N9-type motifs are distributed quite homogeneously across the promoters genome wide (Fig. 4
Loss of AtMIKC* Complexes Affects Pollen Germination in Vitro We identified T-DNA insertion lines for four of the AtMIKC* genes (as described in “Materials and Methods”) and obtained homozygous plants for each line. We then combined the different mutant alleles by crossing, ultimately resulting in the following single and double mutants: agl65, agl66, agl94, agl104, agl65/66, agl65/104, and agl66/104. Only for the agl104 mutant residual expression of the full-length transcript could be observed (Fig. 6
Assuming that the late pollen-expressed AtMIKC* complexes might be important for pollen germination, we performed in vitro germination assays with pollen grains from our different single and double mutant Arabidopsis lines lacking one or more functional AtMIKC* complexes. In Figure 5A
The additional loss of two other complexes (AGL30/66 and AGL94/66) in the agl65/66 double mutant only slightly reduces the germination efficiency further compared to the agl65 mutant, as does the additional reduction of AGL30/104 complex abundance in the agl65/104 double mutant (Fig. 5B Predicted AtMIKC* Target Genes Are Downstream of AtMIKC* Complexes in Vivo The 152 TCP/MPG-specific genes with a MEF2 motif in their 3-kb promoter (listed in Supplemental Table S2), whose expression is up-regulated following the appearance of the AtMIKC* complexes during the TCP stage, are potential direct targets of the AtMIKC* transcription factor complexes. Among them are various genes with a function related to vesicle transport and cytoskeleton, cell wall, and signal transduction (Supplemental Fig. S3). These classes are essential for pollen germination and are generally overrepresented in the transcriptome of mature pollen (Honys and Twell, 2003). We tested the expression of 14 of these in silico predicted target genes by reverse transcription (RT)-PCR, in wild-type and agl66/104 double mutant pollen. For 11 of these 14 genes, we observed differences in expression level between mutant and wild-type pollen (Fig. 6 DISCUSSION MADS-box genes are key regulators of a range of higher plant-specific developmental programs. However, our knowledge of the MADS family in Arabidopsis is mainly limited to the MIKCc subgroup, as only two non-MIKCc genes have been functionally characterized to date (namely AGL37 and AGL80, both from the Mγ subgroup; Köhler et al., 2003; Portereiko et al., 2006). In this study, we initially characterized five additional non-MIKCc MADS-box genes, all belonging to the Mδ or AtMIKC* subgroup and specifically expressed during the tricellular and mature stages of pollen development (Honys and Twell, 2004). We found that five heterodimeric complexes were formed between these AtMIKC* proteins in yeast, at least four of which also exist in planta (Fig. 1, A–D Interestingly, interactions exclusively occur between members of the two monophyletic lineages within the AtMIKC* subgroup (AGL30, AGL65, and AGL94 on one hand, and AGL66 and AGL104 on the other hand) and never between members of the same lineage (Fig. 1E Our experiments suggest a high degree of functional redundancy between the five AtMIKC* complexes. The AGL30/66 and AGL65/66 complexes, which can be considered representative for all five AtMIKC* complexes, most avidly bind the same MEF2 motif CTA(TTTT)TAG/CTA(AAAA)TAG and show hardly any affinity for SRE motifs (Fig. 2A Our in vitro pollen germination experiments (Fig. 5 MADS complexes have always been found to bind a relatively broad spectrum of DNA motifs. An in-depth analysis of the occurrence of their binding motifs in the genome therefore seemed irrelevant. Only the AGL15 homodimer has been reported to exhibit preference for one particular MEF2 motif, CTA(TATA)TAG, but it also binds SRE- and N9-type motifs with comparable affinity (Tang and Perry, 2003). The DNA-binding specificities of AGL30/66 and AGL65/66 are higher than those reported for other MADS-protein complexes, as they hardly show any affinity for SRE-type CArG-boxes, and they can even distinguish between different MEF2 motifs to some extent (Figs. 2A We then carried out a large-scale in silico analysis in which we examined the overall and relative abundance of the individual CArG-boxes, as well as their spatial positioning in Arabidopsis promoters genome wide and in pollen-specific promoters. Thereby, we took advantage of a unique single-cell transcriptome dataset covering the different stages of pollen development (Honys and Twell, 2004). Two additional factors increased the reliability of this analysis: the high DNA-binding specificities of the AtMIKC* complexes and the fact that pollen grains express only a small number of MADS-box genes (Honys and Twell, 2004; Pina et al., 2005). The latter implies that, apart from the AtMIKC* complexes, only few other proteins are expected to bind CArG-boxes in pollen-specific promoters. We observed that MEF2-type CArG-boxes are overall overrepresented in TCP/MPG-specific promoters (Fig. 2B Our example illustrates that specific binding sites can be overrepresented in promoters that share a similar, narrow expression pattern, and this reflects the binding specificity of transcription factors functioning in that specific cell type or during a predefined developmental stage. We think this in silico approach is in general a powerful, indirect tool to help uncover new transcriptional regulatory networks in specific cell types or developmental stages. The concept of using experimentally well-defined transcription factor binding sites as a starting point for a large-scale genomics and single cell-type transcriptomics in silico analysis also seems feasible for other cell types than pollen, and for any transcription factor with a clearly defined DNA-binding preference. The main difficulty lies in obtaining transcriptome data that allow such in silico analyses, but recent technical advances have enabled the purification of trichomes (Zhang and Oppenheimer, 2004), various cell types of the root (Birnbaum et al., 2005), and different stages in xylem development (Kubo et al., 2005), and single cell-type transcriptomics is feasible for all these examples (Birnbaum et al., 2005; Kubo et al., 2005). Laser capture microdissection (e.g. see Wu et al., 2006) will most likely enable the isolation of additional single cell types for transcriptome studies in the near future. With our in silico approach, we identified 152 putative direct target genes of the AtMIKC* complexes in Arabidopsis pollen. These genes are specifically expressed during the last two stages of pollen development and contain at least one MEF2 motif in their 3-kb promoter (Supplemental Table S2). We tested the expression of a random selection of these genes by RT-PCR and found that the majority of them are affected in agl66/104 double mutant pollen (Fig. 6 One of the genes demonstrated to be down-regulated in agl66/104 double mutant pollen is MYB97, one of the seven transcription factor-encoding genes among the predicted direct targets (Fig. 6 The underlying cause of the pollen germination defect remains to be elucidated, but it is likely the result of multiple factors, because quite a few of the putative AtMIKC* target genes have reported or proposed functions in pollen germination. For example, seven cation/proton exchanger-encoding genes are among the putative direct targets (Supplemental Fig. S3), and at least two of them (CHX8 and CHX24) are indeed differentially expressed in agl66/104 double mutant pollen (Fig. 6 Based on the severity of the in vitro pollen germination phenotype of the agl66/104 double mutant (Fig. 5 MATERIALS AND METHODS Isolation and Cloning of MIKC* cDNAs Mature pollen grains were isolated from open flowers of the Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) Columbia accession (grown in a growth chamber at 22°C, with 16 h of light at around 140 μmol m−2 s−1), using the protocol of Honys and Twell (2003). Subsequently, total RNA was isolated with the RNeasy Plant Mini kit (Qiagen), and 5 μg of RNA was used for cDNA synthesis with the Superscript kit (Invitrogen) with oligo(dT) primers. RT-PCR was performed with gene-specific primers to obtain the full-length cDNAs of AGL30 (At2g03060), AGL65 (At1g18750), AGL66 (At1g77980), AGL94 (At1g69540), AGL104 (At1g22130), and AGL18 (At3g57390). All fragments were cloned into the pCR2.1-TOPO vector (Invitrogen), verified by sequencing on a PE Biosystems ABI Prism 377 sequencer by the Max Planck Institute DNA core facility (ADIS), and found to be identical to the sequences reported in the most recent version of the TAIR database. The AGL30 transcript we cloned is identical to the recently created GenBank accession DQ446459 and different from the truncated splice form reported by Kofuji et al. (2003). Y2H The full-length ORF sequences of the five pollen-expressed AtMIKC* genes were cloned into the pGADT7 prey vector and the pGBKT7 bait vector (CLONTECH), which carry the LEU2 and TRP1 selection markers, respectively (AGL30 with NcoI and BamHI, AGL65 with NdeI and BamHI, AGL66 with NcoI, AGL94 with EcoRI and BamHI, and AGL104 with XmaI). The ORF of the pollen-expressed MIKCc gene AGL18 was also cloned into both vectors (with NcoI). Yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) strain AH109 (CLONTECH) was sequentially transformed with all available combinations of bait and prey constructs. The transformation mixtures were plated out onto synthetic dropout medium lacking Leu and Trp to test for transformation efficiency and onto synthetic dropout medium lacking Leu, Trp, and Ade to test for protein-protein interactions. For all AtMIKC* proteins, a strong autoactivation of the bait constructs was observed, and to circumvent this problem, a C-terminal part was removed (by restriction digestion with PstI in case of AGL94 and by PCR with nested primers and recloning in case of the other genes), resulting in a series of ΔC constructs with abolished autoactivation (118 amino acids deleted for AGL30ΔC, 133 for AGL65ΔC, 141 for AGL66ΔC, 133 for AGL94ΔC, and 145 for AGL104ΔC). BiFC We used the BiFC system described by Bracha-Drori et al. (2004) and Walter et al. (2004) to investigate AtMIKC* protein complex formation in planta. The full-length AtMIKC* ORFs were first cloned into the pCR8/GW/TOPO entry vector (Invitrogen) and introduced into the pBaTL-YFPc and pBaTL-YFPn vectors (Hackbusch et al., 2005), which were kindly donated by Drs. J. Uhrig and K. Richter (Max Planck Institute), by Gateway technology (Invitrogen). The constructs were subsequently electroporated into Agrobacterium tumefaciens strain ABI (Koncz and Schell, 1986). Leaves from 3- to 4-week-old Nicotiana benthamiana plants were coinfiltrated with all possible combinations of the available constructs (Fig. 1B EMSA and RBSS The AtMIKC* ORFs were cloned into the pSPUTK vector (Promega) using NcoI (AGL30 and AGL66), SalI and EcoRI (AGL94), HindIII and BamHI (AGL65), and SmaI (AGL104). These constructs (500 ng of plasmid) were used for coupled in vitro transcription and translation with the TnT SP6-Coupled Reticulocyte Lysate system (Promega). Radioactively labeled Met ([35S]Met) was included in this reaction to allow detection of the synthesized proteins on SDS-PAGE gel. In samples meant for testing the DNA-binding properties of heterodimeric complexes, two proteins were synthesized together in one reaction. As a control PpMADS2, a homodimerizing MIKC* protein from the moss Physcomitrella patens was included (R. Hallinger, W. Verelst, W. Faigl, H. Saedler, and T. Münster, unpublished data). In an EMSA reaction, 2 μL of protein sample was mixed with 1 μL of DNA probe in a reaction mixture containing 2.5% (w/v) CHAPS, 9 mm HEPES, pH 7.3, 1.4 mm EDTA, pH 8.0, 8% (w/v) glycerol, 1.33 mm spermidine, 0.9 mm dithiothreitol, 75 ng/μL bovine serum albumin (New England Biolabs), and 11.5 μg/μL autoclaved calf thymus DNA (Serva) and incubated on ice for 30 min. Subsequently, protein-DNA complexes were separated from unbound probes by electrophoresis on a 4% nondenaturing polyacrylamide gel. Bands were visualized using a phosphor screen and a Typhoon 8600 phosphor imager (Molecular Dynamics). For the EMSA experiment illustrated in Figure 1F For RBSS (Pollock and Treisman, 1990), a 62-nucleotide long single-stranded DNA molecule (GGTCAGTTCAGCGGATCCTGTCG-N16-GAGGCGAATTCAGTGCAACTGCG; Birkenbihl et al., 2005), consisting of a completely random core of 16 nucleotides flanked by linkers with EcoRI and BamHI restriction sites, respectively, was radioactively labeled and used in an EMSA experiment as described above. Shifted bands were excised from the polyacrylamide gel, and DNA was eluted by overnight incubation of the gel slices in 1× Tris-EDTA buffer, pH 8.0, 10 mm MgCl2, 0.1% (w/v) SDS, 500 mm Na acetate, pH 5.6, at room temperature. DNA was recovered by phenol chloroform extraction and ethanol precipitation and resuspended in 20 μL 10 mm Tris-HCl, pH 8.0. Of this enriched DNA fraction, 8 μL was relabeled with [α-32P]dCTP in 16 PCR cycles using primers annealing to both linker sequences of the randomized probe and purified by ethanol precipitation. The EMSA procedure was repeated four additional times until the shifted band was intense and no additional background bands were visible anymore. Then the shifted DNA pool was subjected to eight PCR cycles and subsequently cloned into pCR2.1-TOPO (Invitrogen) and transformed into Escherichia coli. Colonies were screened for the presence of inserts by colony PCR, and the inserts of positive clones were sequenced with a vector-specific primer. In competitive EMSA experiments, the only difference with the regular EMSA approach was that the proteins were incubated on ice with unlabeled double-stranded 62-mer fragments for 20 min, prior to the addition of a radioactively labeled probe to the EMSA mixture, followed by another 20 min of incubation. Both the labeled and unlabeled probes were identical to the randomized probe used for RBSS but with a more defined core sequence [NNNCTA(TTTT)TAGNNN, NNNCTA(TATA)TAGNNN, NNNCTA(TTT)TAGNNNN, NNNCTA(TAAT)TAGNNN, and NNNCCTATTTAGGNNN]. These sequences were chosen based on the results of the RBSS experiments (Fig. 2A RT-PCR for Putative Target Genes Total RNA was isolated from mature pollen (as described above), which had been harvested from wild-type and agl66/104 double mutant plants grown in a greenhouse during summer, with temperature controlled at 22°C and 16 h of light at around 120 μmol m−2 s−1. Primers for RT-PCR on predicted target genes were designed in the 3′ region of the ORF, they usually coincided with probe sets for these genes used on the ATH1 microarray chip (Affymetrix), and wherever possible spanned an intron. RT-PCR was performed for 14 predicted target genes using 150 ng cDNA and gene-specific primers. As a control, 18S ribosomal RNA was amplified using the QuantumRNA primer-competimer approach from Ambion, with a 2:8 ratio of primer-competimer and 35 PCR cycles. The number of PCR cycles was optimized for each gene: 20 cycles for At1g74000, At1g17540, At4g18700, At5g35390, At3g46520, At1g13890, and At5g64790; 25 cycles for At4g26930, At5g55980, At2g28180, At5g19610, and At2g05850; 30 cycles for At2g44560, AGL66, and AGL104; and 35 cycles for At5g37060. In Vitro Pollen Germination For in vitro germination of pollen the protocol of Li et al. (1999) was used. The experiment was performed three times and averages are presented in Figure 5B Viability staining of pollen was performed with fluorescein-3′,6′-diacetate according to Eady et al. (1995), and at least 300 pollen grains were observed. In Silico Analyses The protein sequence alignment in Supplemental Figure S1 was created with ClustalW (Chenna et al., 2003). Arabidopsis promoter and 5′UTR sequences genome wide were screened for CArG-boxes using the Patmatch tool on the TAIR Web site (www.arabidopsis.org), and for BCP- and TCP/MPG-specific genes they were downloaded using the Bulk downloads option. For genes with available 5′UTR information, the length of the 5′UTR was added to the distance of CArG-boxes from the end of the 3-kb promoter sequence to obtain their correct distance to the ATG (see Supplemental Table S2). The dataset from Honys and Twell (2004) was downloaded from the Genome Biology Web site (http://genomebiology.com) and reanalyzed using Access and Excel software (Microsoft). The pollen-specific expression of genes identified as BCP- or TCP/MPG-specific in this dataset was verified against all publicly available microarray datasets, using the Genevestigator tool (Zimmermann et al., 2004). Supplemental Data The following materials are available in the online version of this article.
[Supplemental Data]
Acknowledgments We thank Drs. Joachim Uhrig and Klaus Richter for vectors and practical help with BiFC, Dr. Suzanne Kuijt for assistance with confocal microscopy, and Drs. Zsuzsanna Schwarz-Sommer, Rainer Birkenbihl, Malgorzata Domagalska, and two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments and critically reading the manuscript. Notes The author responsible for distribution of materials integral to the findings presented in this article in accordance with the policy described in the Instructions for Authors (www.plantphysiol.org) is: Wim Verelst (verelst/at/mpiz-koeln.mpg.de). [W]The online version of this article contains Web-only data. References
|
PubMed related articles
Your browsing activity is empty. Activity recording is turned off. |
|||||||||||||||
EMBO J. 1999 Oct 1; 18(19):5370-9.
[EMBO J. 1999]Nature. 2001 Jan 25; 409(6819):525-9.
[Nature. 2001]Nature. 2001 Jan 25; 409(6819):469-71.
[Nature. 2001]Genes Dev. 1988 Dec; 2(12B):1713-22.
[Genes Dev. 1988]Nucleic Acids Res. 1996 Aug 15; 24(16):3134-41.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 1996]Plant Mol Biol. 2000 Jan; 42(1):115-49.
[Plant Mol Biol. 2000]Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2003 Dec; 29(3):464-89.
[Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2003]Trends Plant Sci. 2003 Oct; 8(10):475-83.
[Trends Plant Sci. 2003]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Nov 11; 100(23):13407-12.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Feb 17; 101(7):1910-5.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 May 9; 97(10):5328-33.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Mar 18; 94(6):2415-20.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997]Genes Dev. 1991 Mar; 5(3):484-95.
[Genes Dev. 1991]Eur J Biochem. 1995 Apr 1; 229(1):1-13.
[Eur J Biochem. 1995]Plant Cell. 2003 Jul; 15(7):1538-51.
[Plant Cell. 2003]Mol Biol Evol. 2003 Dec; 20(12):1963-77.
[Mol Biol Evol. 2003]Mol Biol Evol. 2002 Jun; 19(6):801-14.
[Mol Biol Evol. 2002]Plant Biol (Stuttg). 2005 May; 7(3):307-14.
[Plant Biol (Stuttg). 2005]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Feb 17; 101(7):1910-5.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004]Plant Mol Biol. 2004 Oct; 56(3):351-66.
[Plant Mol Biol. 2004]Mol Biol Evol. 2003 Dec; 20(12):1963-77.
[Mol Biol Evol. 2003]Genome Biol. 2004; 5(11):R85.
[Genome Biol. 2004]Plant Cell. 2004; 16 Suppl():S142-53.
[Plant Cell. 2004]Plant Physiol. 2005 Jun; 138(2):744-56.
[Plant Physiol. 2005]Mol Biol Evol. 2003 Dec; 20(12):1963-77.
[Mol Biol Evol. 2003]Plant Cell. 2005 May; 17(5):1424-33.
[Plant Cell. 2005]Genome Biol. 2004; 5(11):R85.
[Genome Biol. 2004]Mol Biol Evol. 2003 Dec; 20(12):1963-77.
[Mol Biol Evol. 2003]Plant Physiol. 2005 Jun; 138(2):744-56.
[Plant Physiol. 2005]Genome Biol. 2004; 5(11):R85.
[Genome Biol. 2004]Plant Physiol. 2004 Sep; 136(1):2621-32.
[Plant Physiol. 2004]Nat Genet. 2005 May; 37(5):501-6.
[Nat Genet. 2005]Trends Plant Sci. 2006 May; 11(5):224-31.
[Trends Plant Sci. 2006]Plant J. 2000 Oct; 24(1):1-9.
[Plant J. 2000]J Biol Chem. 2003 Jul 25; 278(30):28154-9.
[J Biol Chem. 2003]J Biol Chem. 2003 Jul 25; 278(30):28154-9.
[J Biol Chem. 2003]Plant Physiol. 2003 Jun; 132(2):640-52.
[Plant Physiol. 2003]Genes Dev. 2003 Jun 15; 17(12):1540-53.
[Genes Dev. 2003]Plant Cell. 2006 Aug; 18(8):1862-72.
[Plant Cell. 2006]Genome Biol. 2004; 5(11):R85.
[Genome Biol. 2004]Plant J. 2004 Nov; 40(3):428-38.
[Plant J. 2004]Trends Plant Sci. 2006 May; 11(5):224-31.
[Trends Plant Sci. 2006]J Biol Chem. 2003 Jul 25; 278(30):28154-9.
[J Biol Chem. 2003]Genome Biol. 2004; 5(11):R85.
[Genome Biol. 2004]Plant Physiol. 2005 Jun; 138(2):744-56.
[Plant Physiol. 2005]Plant Cell Physiol. 2004 Feb; 45(2):221-4.
[Plant Cell Physiol. 2004]Nat Methods. 2005 Aug; 2(8):615-9.
[Nat Methods. 2005]Genes Dev. 2005 Aug 15; 19(16):1855-60.
[Genes Dev. 2005]Plant Cell Physiol. 2006 Jan; 47(1):107-27.
[Plant Cell Physiol. 2006]Trends Plant Sci. 2006 May; 11(5):224-31.
[Trends Plant Sci. 2006]Plant Physiol. 2004 Sep; 136(1):2532-47.
[Plant Physiol. 2004]J Cell Sci. 2001 Jun; 114(Pt 12):2241-53.
[J Cell Sci. 2001]Plant Cell. 2002 Apr; 14(4):945-62.
[Plant Cell. 2002]Plant Physiol. 2003 Jun; 132(2):640-52.
[Plant Physiol. 2003]Mol Biol Evol. 2003 Dec; 20(12):1963-77.
[Mol Biol Evol. 2003]Plant J. 2004 Nov; 40(3):419-27.
[Plant J. 2004]Plant J. 2004 Nov; 40(3):428-38.
[Plant J. 2004]Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Mar 29; 102(13):4908-12.
[Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005]Plant J. 2003 Mar; 33(5):949-56.
[Plant J. 2003]J Mol Biol. 2005 Sep 23; 352(3):585-96.
[J Mol Biol. 2005]Plant Cell. 1999 Sep; 11(9):1731-42.
[Plant Cell. 1999]Science. 2003 Aug 1; 301(5633):653-7.
[Science. 2003]Plant Cell. 1995 Jan; 7(1):65-74.
[Plant Cell. 1995]Nucleic Acids Res. 2003 Jul 1; 31(13):3497-500.
[Nucleic Acids Res. 2003]Genome Biol. 2004; 5(11):R85.
[Genome Biol. 2004]Plant Physiol. 2004 Sep; 136(1):2621-32.
[Plant Physiol. 2004]