(a) Schematic diagram of root and dark grown hypocotyl growth. The growth direction of root and hypocotyl is named as cell growth axis. The observed cells for MTs array were in the transition zone (highlighted by red line) of root and in the elongation zone of dark grown hypocotyl (highlighted by grey frame). The arrays of MTs in root and hypocotyl were depicted for the expanding cells.
(b-f) MAP4-GFP or TUA6-RFP visualization of MTs orientation in roots was performed by time-lapse observation (every 10min, ’=min) following 100nM NAA or IAA treatment, and deviated angles of individual MTs were quantified as transversal MTs (90±30°) or longitudinal MTs (0-60°/120-180°). In (c) and (f), Student’s T-test was calculated for transversal MTs in comparison to untreated roots (* p<0.05; ** p<0.001).
(g-h) MAP4-GFP visualization and quantification of MTs orientation in roots after 1μM 2-NAA treatment for 60min or after transfer of seedlings on acidified 1/2 MS medium at pH4.9 for 30min, 90min and 180min. Student’s T-test was calculated for transversal MTs in treated samples in comparison to 1/2MS (pH5.8) growing roots used as controls (** p<0.001).
(i-k) Auxin distribution approximated by DII-Venus at the lower side (LS) and upper side (US) of 90° reoriented WT root (in DII-Venus background). Enlarged pictures (i) are shown as the frames highlighted (k). Signal intensity is represented by the color code as indicated. The relative signal for the US and LS (j) is expressed in comparison to the signal in the respective frame before gravistimulation. Student’s T-test was calculated for the signal between US and LS at each time point (** p<0.001).
In all panels, error bars are s.e.m. Scale bars: 5 μm (b, d, e, g) and 30 μm (k).

(a-b) MAP4-GFP visualization of MTs orientation in WT and tir1-1afb1-1afb2-1afb3-1 (abbreviated as tir1afb1,2,3) seedlings following 100nM NAA treatment for 60min. The proportion of cells with the four categories of MTs orientation patterns was determined, and the student’s T-test was calculated for the category of transversal MT in comparison to WT treated in the same condition (** p<0.001).
(c-f) MAP4-GFP visualization and quantification of MTs orientation in roots (c-d) or dark grown hypocotyls (e-f) of WT, SS12S and SS12K seedlings following different time of ethanol induction as indicated. Student’s T-test was calculated for the transversal MTs in comparison to WT exposed for the same time to ethanol vapors than the conditional ABP1 lines (* p<0.05, ** p<0.001).
In all panels, error bars are s.e.m. Scale bars: 5μm (a, c) and 10μm (e).

(a) Rearrangement of MTs at the LS compared with the US of 90° reoriented roots of WT, SS12S, SS12K, abp1-5 (all expressing MAP4-GFP). Two different types of MTs orientation (90±30° or 0-60°/120-180°) were quantified. Student’s T-test was calculated for the category of transversal MTs in comparison to each 0’ time point and calculated for transversal MTs in the LS in comparison of the US at each time point (** p<0.001).
(b-c) Auxin distribution simulated by DII-Venus at the LS compared with the US of 90° reoriented roots of SS12S and SS12K (all in DII-Venus background, enlarged pictures was visualized as the frames highlighted). Image stacks were taken every 10min, and in total 60 min (’). The ratio of the LS signal divided by the US one is shown in the chart (c). Student’s T-test was calculated for the signal ratio at each time point of SS12S/K compared with WT (** p<0.001). Signal intensity is represented by the color code as indicated. To be compared to WT data ().
(d) The deviated angles of 90° gravistimulated-roots of WT, abp1-5, SS12S and SS12K seedlings were calculated for every 30min, in total 8h (Student’s T-test, *p<0.05, ** p<0.001).
In all panels, error bars are s.e.m. Scale bars: 5 μm (a) and 30 μm (b).

(a-b) Acquisition and quantification of the rate of EB1b movement in roots of untreated or 100nM NAA-treated (60min) WT or SS12K (expressing EB1b-GFP) by measuring EB1b-GFP growth events as highlighted by red lines (Student’s T-test, p>0.05). Box plots indicate the 25 percentage (bottom boundary), median (middle line), 75 percentage (top boundary), the nearest observations within 1.5 times, the interquartile range and outliers.
(c) EB1b movement was simulated as transversal (blue, 90±30°) or longitudinal (red, 0-60°/120-180°) trajectories before (0”) and after 180”100 nM NAA treatment in WT background (color maps). The blue/red surface ratio is quantified as the chart (n=5). Corresponding to .
(d) MTs orientation patterns after 400μM cordycepin plus NAA cotreatment. Student’s T-test was calculated for the category of transversal MT in comparison to only cordycepin treatment (** p<0.001).
(e) EB1b trajectories (simulated by time-stack from 10min videos) were visualized and quantified after DMSO, IAA (1μM), PEO-IAA (10μM), and PEO-IAA (10μM) plus IAA (1μM) treatments. The left panel shows successive frames of 90sec acquisitions following IAA application of pretreated PEO-IAA WT roots. Student’s T-test was calculated for the category of transversal MTs in comparison to DMSO treatment at each time point (** p<0.001).
(f-i) Projections of EB1b-GFP in SS12K roots (f) and quantification (g) from every 15 sec acquisitions during 10 min (, ) following DMSO or 100 nM NAA application (n=10). Blue and red strips represent transversal (90±30°) and oblique/longitudinal (0-60°/120-180°) directions, respectively (f). Color maps show the simulated transversal or longitudinal trajectories of EB1b before (0”) and after 180”100 nM NAA treatment in SS12K (h) or SS12S (i) roots. The blue/red surface ratio is quantified as the charts (n=5) (h-i). The data of SS12S (i) is corresponding to . Compared to WT situation (, Extended Data Fig. 4c).
In all panels, error bars are s.e.m and scale bars are 5 μm.

(a-c) ABP1 and ABP1-GFP transcripts (a) and ABP1 protein level (b-c) were detected in WT and XVE>>ABP1-OE line before and after 2μM estradiol induction for 12h or 48h prior to RNA or protein extraction. The transcript levels of ABP1 in WT with DMSO treatment was standardized as “1” (a). 22KDa native ABP1 band and 49KDa ABP1-GFP band were detected and quantified in the right chart. The protein level of native ABP1 or ABP1-GFP in WT was standardized as “1” for each ABP1 and ABP1-GFP, respectively (b-c). Student’s T-test, ** p<0.001.
(d) Time-lapse observation of MTs orientation in the roots of XVE>>ABP1-OE roots expressing TUA6-RFP, WT and abp1-5 (both expressing MAP4-GFP) upon 100 nM NAA treatment. The percentage of reorientated MTs (0-60°/120-180°) was quantified. Reorientated MTs in the inducible XVE>>ABP1-OE TUA6-RFP roots were calculated in comparison to none-inducible roots, and abp1-5 MAP4-GFP was compared to MAP4-GFP situation at each time point (Student’s T-test, * p<0.05, ** p<0.001).
In all panels, error bars are s.e.m and scale bars are 5 μm.

Orientation and polymerization status of MTs were visualized following transfer of seedlings to different concentrations of CaCl₂ for 30min, 90min or 180min. Low calcium level disrupted MTs organization leading to predominantly random pattern and high calcium caused MT depolymerization. Student’s T-test was calculated for the category of transversal MTs in comparison to seedlings grown and transferred on standard 1/2 MS (with 1.5mM CaCl₂) seedlings (*p<0.05, ** p<0.001). In all panels, error bars are s.e.m. and scale bars are 5μm.

(a) MAP4-GFP visualization of MTs orientation in the root of WT, rop6-1, ric1-1, SS12S ric1-1, SS12K ric1-1 following DMSO application for 60 min. Corresponding to quantifications in .
(b-c) MTs reorientation patterns were visualized by MAP4-GFP in the roots of WT and rop6-1^+/− following DMSO or 100nM NAA application for 60 min (Student’s T-test, p>0.05).
(d) The transcript level of the scFv12 coding the recombinant antibody responsible for ABP1 knockdown in WT, ric1-1, ktn1, SS12S, SS12K, SS12S ric1-1, SS12K ric1-1, SS12S ktn1 and SS12K ktn1 after 48h ethanol induction. The transcript level of the scFv12 in SS12S was standardized as “1” (Student’s T-test, p>0.05).
(e) MTs orientation by MAP4-GFP in dark grown hypocotyls of WT, SS12K, ktn1, SS12K ktn1 (with 24h ethanol induction) following DMSO application for 60 min. Corresponding to . In all panels, error bars are s.e.m. Scale bars: 5μm (a-b) and 10μm (d).

(a-b) MAP4-GFP visualization of MTs orientation in roots (a) and etiolated hypocotyls (b) by time-lapse imaging following 100 nM NAA or 10 μM IAA treatment, respectively. The cartoon illustrates the four categories of MTs orientation.
(c) EB1b-GFP visualization of MTs trajectories at the LS and US sides of 90° gravistimulated roots. EB1b trajectories were quantified as transversal (90±30°) or longitudinal (0-60°/120-180°) MTs.
In all panels, error bars are s.e.m. and student’s T-test was calculated for transversal MTs (*p<0.05, ** p<0.001). Scale bars: 5 μm (a, c), 10 μm (b).

(a-b) MAP4-GFP visualization of MTs reorientation in WT, abp1-5, SS12S/K root (a) and hypocotyl (b) induced with ethanol vapors for 48h (a) and 8h (b) and following 60 min treatment with DMSO, 100 nM NAA (a) or 10 μM IAA (b). The ratio of transversal MTs in DMSO-versus NAA-treated is indicated above the charts (a, b). In all panels, error bars are s.e.m. and student’s T-test was calculated for transversal MTs (** p<0.001). Scale bars: 5 μm (a) and 10 μm (b).

(a-b) Projections of EB1b-GFP in WT (a) or SS12S (b) roots (left panels) and quantification (right charts) from every 15 sec acquisitions during 10 min (, , , ) following DMSO or 100 nM NAA application (n=10). Blue and red strips represent transversal (90±30°) and oblique/longitudinal (0-60°/120-180°) directions, respectively.
In all panels, error bars are s.e.m. determined by student’s T-test (*p<0.05, ** p<0.001). Scale bars: 5 μm.

(a) MTs orientation and quantification in roots of WT, rop6-1, ric1-1, SS12S/K ric1-1 following 60 min of DMSO or 100 nM NAA application.
(b) MTs orientation and quantification in 24h ethanol induced hypocotyls of WT, SS12K, ktn1 and SS12K ktn1 following 60 min of DMSO or 10 μM IAA application.
The ratio of transversal MTs in DMSO-versus NAA/IAA-treated is indicated above the charts (a, b). In all panels, error bars are s.e.m. and student’s T-test was calculated for transversal MTs (** p<0.001). Scale bars: 5 μm (a) and 10 μm (b).