|
Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M109722200 on February 6, 2002
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 16, 13641-13649, April 19, 2002
Rice -Amylase Transcriptional Enhancers Direct Multiple Mode
Regulation of Promoters in Transgenic Rice*
Peng-Wen
Chen ,
Chung-An
Lu ,
Tien-Shin
Yu ,
Tung-Hi
Tseng§,
Chang-Sheng
Wang§, and
Su-May
Yu ¶
From the Institute of Molecular Biology, Academia
Sinica, Nankang, Taipei, Taiwan 115, Republic of China and the
§ Taiwan Agricultural Research Institute, Wu-Fong,
Taichung, Taiwan 413, Republic of China
Received for publication, October 9, 2001, and in revised form, February 1, 2002
 |
ABSTRACT |
Expression of -amylase genes in cereals is
induced by both gibberellin (GA) and sugar starvation. In a transient
expression assay, a 105-bp sugar response sequence (SRS) in the
promoter of a sugar starvation highly inducible rice -amylase gene,
Amy3, was shown previously to confer sugar response and
to enhance the activity of the rice Act1 promoter in rice
protoplasts. A 230-bp SRS-like sequence was also found in the promoter
of another sugar starvation highly inducible rice -amylase gene,
Amy8. The Amy8 SRS contains a GA
response sequence and was designated as Amy8 SRS/GARS.
In the present study, a transgenic approach was employed to
characterize the function of the -amylase gene SRSs in rice. We
found that the Amy3 SRS significantly enhances the
endogenous expression pattern of the Act1 promoter in
various rice tissues throughout their developmental stages. By
contrast, the Amy8 SRS/GARS significantly enhances
Act1 promoter activity only in embryos and endosperms of
germinating rice seeds. A minimal promoter fused to the
Amy8 SRS/GARS is specifically active in rice
embryo and endosperm and is subject to sugar repression and GA
induction in rice embryos. This sugar repression was found to override
GA induction of Amy8 SRS/GARS activity. Our study
demonstrates that the -amylase transcriptional enhancers contain
cis-acting elements capable of enhancing endogenous expression patterns
or activating sugar-sensitive, hormone-responsive, tissue-specific, and
developmental stage-dependent expression of promoters in
transgenic rice. These enhancers may facilitate the design of highly
active and tightly regulated composite promoters for monocot
transformation and gene expression. Our study also reveals the
existence of cross-talk between the sugar and GA signaling pathways in
cereals and provides a system for analyzing the underlying
molecular mechanisms involved.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
-Amylases were originally noted for their expression as
regulated by GA1 and their
importance in starch utilization in germinating cereal grains (1).
During germination of cereal grains, the embryo synthesizes GA that
diffuses to the aleurone cells and acts as a signal to activate the
synthesis and secretion of -amylases and other hydrolases. These
enzymes digest the starch stored in the endosperm and provide sugars
for the growth of young seedlings. We now know that expression of
-amylase genes is activated by sugar deprivation and repressed by
sugar provision in cultured rice suspension cells (2, 3) and in the
embryos of germinating rice (4) and barley (5) seeds. This sugar
regulation of -amylase gene expression has recently become a model
system for studying the molecular mechanisms that mediate sugar
repression in plants (6, 7).
Sugar repression of -amylase gene expression involves control of
both transcription rate and mRNA stability (8-10). The
Amy3 SRS was shown to confer sugar responsiveness to a
cauliflower mosaic virus 35S RNA (CaMV35S) minimal promoter
in an orientation-independent manner (11). The Amy3 SRS
contains three essential motifs: the GC box, the G box, and the TATCCA
element (Fig. 1a) for a high
level of sugar starvation-induced gene expression in rice protoplasts
(11). All of the -amylase genes isolated from rice, barley, and
wheat contain a TATCCA element or its variants at the proximity
of ~90-150 bp, upstream of transcription start sites (6). Mutations
of the TATCCA element in the promoters of two barley -amylase genes,
Amy-pHV19 (12) and Amy32b (13), lowered expression to about 20% of the wild-type sequence but maintained GA
responsiveness in the barley aleurone. The TATCCA element is duplicated
in the Amy3 promoter, and mutation of each of the duplicated TATCCA elements also reduced the Amy3 promoter
activity to 12 and 8%, respectively, of the wild-type sequence but
maintained sugar starvation inducibility in the rice protoplasts (11). The TATCCA element significantly enhanced transcription of the CaMV35S minimal promoter in rice protoplasts in a dose- and
glucose-dependent manner, suggesting that the TATCCA
element serves as a transcriptional enhancer (11).

View larger version (39K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Nucleotide sequences of the
Amy3 SRS and Amy8
SRS/GARS. a, the sequences are
numbered relative to the transcription start sites (+1) of
the Amy3 and Amy8 promoters (11).
b, nucleotide sequence comparison of the GC box present in
Amy3 SRS and Amy8 SRS/GARS.
|
|
One of the most important considerations in developing a plant
transformation procedure is the availability of a promoter that
provides a reliable high level expression of introduced genes in target
cells or tissues. Monocot plants, particularly the cereal species,
comprise an economically important group of plant species that could
benefit from the introduction and expression of foreign genes that
control agronomically important traits and overproduction of
biomolecules. The rice Act1 promoter is one of the most
frequently used highly active and constitutive promoters (14) in the
establishment of transformation procedures and expression of foreign
genes in rice and other monocots. Another constitutive promoter that is also commonly used for transformation of monocots is the maize Ubi promoter (15). In general, the maize Ubi
promoter has slightly higher activity than the rice Act1
promoter in various monocot species (16-18). However, we found that
the maize Ubi and rice Act1 promoters frequently
do not lead to a high level of foreign gene expression in transgenic rice.
Various strategies can be employed to increase the activity of
constitutive promoters in transformed cereals (16, 18). One strategy is
to add an enhancer element that increases the transcription of a
promoter. In plants, extra copies of enhancer elements can enhance the
activity of a homologous promoter, e.g. the anaerobic
responsive element to the maize Adh1 promoter (19). Multiple
copies of enhancer elements have also been employed to enhance the
activity of a heterologous promoter, e.g. the octopine synthase enhancer from Agrobacterium tumefaciens to the
maize Adh1 promoter (20). Previously, we found that
insertion of three tandem copies of the rice Amy3 SRS in
the Act1 promoter significantly enhances the promoter
activity in rice protoplasts in a dose-dependent manner
(11).
Unlike the Amy3 SRS, SRSs in promoters of other sugar
starvation-inducible genes have not been extensively characterized. Previously, we showed that the GC box and TATCCA element are both present in the promoter of Amy8 but that only the TATCCA
element is present in the promoter of a sucrose deprivation lowly
inducible rice -amylase gene, Amy7 (11). In the
present study, we demonstrate that the -amylase transcriptional
enhancers contain cis-acting elements capable of enhancing the
endogenous expression pattern or activating high level sugar-sensitive,
hormone-dependent, and tissue-specific expression of
promoters in transgenic rice. The present study also shows that sugar
suppresses the GA responsiveness of Amy8 SRS/GARS,
thereby suggesting an interaction between the sugar and GA signaling pathways.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Plant Material--
The rice variety used in this study was
Oryza sativa L. cv. Tainung 67. Immature seeds were
dehulled, sterilized with 3% NaOCl for 30 min, washed extensively with
sterile water, and placed on N6D agar medium (41) for callus induction.
After 1 month, calli derived from scutellum were subcultured in fresh
N6D medium for transformation.
Plasmid Construction--
For construction of the plasmid
containing the Act1-Luc chimeric gene, the EcoRI
site in the multiple cloning sites of pBluescript SKII+ (Stratagene)
was first removed by digestion with EcoRI and then
blunt-ended and re-ligated. The rice Act1 5' region
(including 1.4-kb 5'-flanking sequence, 79-bp 5' noncoding exon, 447-bp
5' intron, and 25-bp first coding exon) was excised from pDM302 (42) with HindIII and subcloned into the same site in
pBluescript, which lacked the EcoRI site to generate pAct.
The Amy3 SRS ( 186 to 82 relative to the transcription
start site of Amy3) was PCR-amplified using
oligonucleotides 5'-CCCGAATTCATCCCGTCGCCTTGGAGA-3' (EcoRI site underlined) as the 5' primer and
5'-CCCGAATTCAGAGACGACAATAAT-3' (EcoRI site
underlined) as the 3' primer and p3G-132II (11), which contains the
1.7-kb 5' region of Amy3, as the DNA template. The DNA
fragment containing the SRS was digested with EcoRI and inserted into the EcoRI site ( 459 relative to the
transcription start site) of the Act1 promoter in three
tandem repeats in the correct orientation to generate pACT-3SRS. A
SalI-BglII fragment containing the Luc
coding sequence-Nos terminator fusion was excised form
pJD312 (43), blunt-ended, and inserted into the SmaI site of
pAct and pAct-3SRS to generate pB-Act-LN and pB-Act-3SRS-LN. pB-Act-LN
and pB-Act-3SRS-LN were linearized with PstI and inserted into the same site in the binary vector pSMY1H (39), which
contains the 35S promoter Hph coding region tumor
morphology large gene (Tml) terminator fusion gene, thereby
generating pAct-LN and pAct-3SRS-LN.
Transformation of Rice--
Plasmids pAct-LN and pAct-SRS-LN
were introduced into A. tumefaciens strain EHA101 (44) with
an electroporator (BTX, San Diego, CA) according to the manufacturer's
instructions. Calli induced from immature rice seeds were co-cultured
with A. tumefaciens, and putative transgenic plants were
regenerated from calli according to the methods described by Hiei
et al. (36) and Toki (41).
Suspension Cell Culture--
Transformed calli were propagated
as described previously (2). Established suspension cells were
subcultured as described previously (11).
Luciferase Activity Assay--
Total proteins were extracted
from cultured suspension cells or plant tissues with a CCLR buffer (100 mM KH2(PO4), pH 7.8, 1 mM EDTA, 10% glycerol, 1% Triton X-100, 7 mM
-mercaptoethanol), and the protein concentration was determined with
a Coomassie protein assay reagent (Pierce). Luciferase activity assay
was performed as described previously (11).
 |
RESULTS |
The Amy3 SRS Enhances Act1 Promoter Activity in Transformed Rice
Suspension Cells--
Previously, we showed in a protoplast transient
expression assay that insertion of three copies of the
Amy3 SRS at position 459 bp upstream of the transcription
start site of an 846-bp Act1 promoter significantly enhanced
Act1 promoter activity (11). To determine whether similar
results could be produced in stably transformed rice cells, the firefly
luciferase gene (Luc) was fused downstream of the
Act1 promoter or the Act1 promoter containing three tandem copies of Amy3 SRS, generating
Act1-Luc and Act1-3SRS-Luc, and the
resulted chimeric genes (Fig. 2) were
introduced into the rice genome via Agrobacterium-mediated
transformation. Several transformed cell lines were obtained, and four
lines for each construct were randomly selected for further study. The
transformed calli were cultured as suspension cells. These cells were
then cultured in medium with or without sucrose for 2 days prior to luciferase assay. The luciferase activity conferred by the wild-type Act1 promoter was very low in sucrose-starved cells and was
6- to 8-fold less than in sucrose-provided cells (Fig.
3). By contrast, the luciferase activity
conferred by the Act1-3SRS promoter increased dramatically
in sucrose-starved cells to ~2-5.5-fold of that in sucrose-provided
cells (Fig. 3). Notably, the Act1-3SRS promoter conferred
significantly higher luciferase activity regardless of whether cells
were cultured with or without sucrose. These results suggest that in
stably transformed rice suspension cells, expression of luciferase is
significantly enhanced by integration of the Amy3 SRS
into the Act1 promoter. Additionally, the Amy3 SRS converts the sugar-inducible Act1 promoter into a sugar
starvation-inducible promoter.

View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Expression cassettes for rice
transformation. Plasmid pAct-LN contains the wild-type
Act1 promoter. pAct-3SRS-LN contains three tandem repeats of
the Amy3 SRS, and pAct-8SRS/GARS-LN contains three tandem
repeats of the Amy8 SRS/GARS inserted in the
EcoRI site (459 bp upstream of the transcription site) of
the Act1 promoter. p8SRS/GARS-35S-LN contains one copy of
the Amy8 SRS/GARS fused upstream of the
CaMV35S minimal promoter. Luc was
transcriptionally fused downstream of the above promoters and upstream
of the nopaline synthase gene terminator (Nos 3).
|
|

View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
The Amy3 SRS enhances
Act1 promoter activity in transformed rice suspension
cells. Transformed rice suspension cells carrying the
Act1-Luc gene or the Act1-3SRS-Luc
gene were cultured in the presence of sucrose (+ sucrose, open
bar) or absence of sucrose ( sucrose, filled bar) for
2 days. Cells were collected, and luciferase activity was determined
from four independently transformed rice cell lines for each
construct.
|
|
The Amy3 SRS Generally Enhances Act1 Promoter Activity in
Transgenic Rice--
To determine whether integration of the
Amy3 SRS into the Act1 promoter enhances
expression of luciferase in transgenic rice plants, transformed calli
carrying Act1-Luc and Act1-3SRS-Luc chimeric genes were regenerated and then self-fertilized for three generations to obtain T3 homozygous seeds. The homozygosity of transgenic seeds was determined by the germinating 25 transgenic seeds
in water containing 50 µg/ml hygromycin for 7 days and then calculating the ratio between the number of growing and non-growing seedlings. Theoretically, seeds of a transgenic line homozygous for the
transgene should all germinate and grow under these conditions. T3
homozygous seeds of four transgenic lines carrying Act1-Luc and eight transgenic lines carrying Act1-3SRS-Luc
were germinated and grown for 8 days. Leaves were collected from
seedlings and assayed for luciferase activity. The luciferase activity
was not significantly different in the leaves of all transgenic lines carrying the same construct. The average luciferase activity conferred by the Act1-3SRS promoter in different transformants was
similar: ~2.5- to 3-fold higher than that conferred by the
Act1 promoter (Fig. 4). These
results indicate that the Amy3 SRS generally enhances
Act1 promoter activity in transgenic rice.

View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
The Amy3 SRS generally
enhances Act1 promoter activity in transgenic
rice. Five seeds each of four T3 transgenic rice lines carrying
Act1-Luc (open column) and eight T3
transgenic rice lines carrying Act1-3SRS-Luc
(filled column) were germinated and grown in the dark for 8 days. Leaves were collected from five seedlings of each transgenic line
and then pooled and assayed for luciferase activity.
|
|
The Amy3 SRS Enhances Developmentally Regulated Act1 Promoter
Activity in Various Tissues of Transgenic Rice--
To determine
whether the Act1-3SRS chimeric promoter enhances expression
of luciferase in different tissues of germinating seeds and seedlings,
T3 homozygous seeds of transgenic lines Act 6-9-1 and Act(3SRS) 5-15-1 were germinated and grown for 2 weeks. Various tissues were collected
and assayed for luciferase activity. The Act1-3SRS promoter
conferred higher luciferase activity than the Act1 promoter
in various tissues of germinating seeds and seedlings (Fig.
5). The difference in enhancement of
luciferase activity was most dramatic in roots (5- to 56-fold) and next
in shoots (4- to 11-fold) and embryos (3- to 18-fold). The luciferase activity in various organs conferred by both the Act1 and
Act1-3SRS promoters peaked within 7-8 days after
germination and declined thereafter.

View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
The Amy3 SRS enhances
Act1 promoter activity in various tissues of
germinating seeds and seedlings of transgenic rice. T3 homozygous
seeds of transgenic lines Act 6-9-1 and Act(3SRS) 5-15-1 carrying the
Act1-Luc gene (open column) and
Act1-3SRS-Luc gene (filled column),
respectively, were germinated and grown in the dark for 14 days. On
each day, endosperms, embryos, shoots, and roots were collected from
five germinating seeds or seedlings and then pooled and assayed for
luciferase activity.
|
|
To determine the luciferase expression pattern under control of the
Act1-3SRS promoter in seedlings and older plants, T3
homozygous seeds of transgenic lines Act 6-9-1 and Act(3SRS) 5-15-1 were germinated and grown for 8 weeks. Various tissues were collected and assayed for luciferase activity. The Act1-3SRS promoter
conferred significantly higher luciferase activity than the
Act1 promoter in various tissues of transgenic rice plants
(Fig. 6a). The
difference in enhancement of luciferase activity was highest in root
(7- to 38-fold), next highest in leaf (5- to 20-fold), and lowest in
sheath (4- to 7-fold). The total luciferase activity in the leaf,
sheath, and root of transgenic seedlings or plants as described in Fig.
6a was calculated and compared (Fig. 6b). The
data shown in Figs. 5 and 6 demonstrate that the luciferase activity in
transgenic rice, conferred by both the Act1 and
Act1-3SRS promoters, fluctuates in a developmental
stage-dependent manner. The luciferase activity in various
tissues reached its first peak within 1 week after germination, reached
its lowest level at week 2 or 3, and rose again at week 4.

View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
The Amy3 SRS enhances
developmentally regulated Act1 promoter activity in
various tissues of transgenic rice. T3 homozygous seeds of transgenic lines Act 6-9-1 and Act(3SRS)
5-15-1 carrying the Act1-Luc gene (open column)
and Act1-SRS-Luc gene (filled column),
respectively, were germinated and grown in a greenhouse for 8 weeks
(a). After each week, leaves, sheaths, and roots were
collected from five plants and assayed for luciferase activity.
Error bars indicate the standard deviation of luciferase
activity in five plants. Average luciferase activity in leaf
(hatched box), sheath (open box), and root
(filled box) of T3 transgenic rice lines Act 6-9-1 and
Act(SRS) 5-15-1 determined each week as shown in panel a is
summed and presented as stacked columns (b).
|
|
To determine whether growth conditions affect the efficacy of the
Amy3 SRS in enhancing Act1 promoter activity,
T3 homozygous seeds of transgenic lines Act 6-9-1 and Act(3SRS) 5-15-1 were allowed to germinate and grow in the dark or in a 12-h light/12-h dark cycle for 12 days. Leaves of transgenic rice seedlings were collected and assayed for luciferase activity. The luciferase activity
conferred by the Act1-3SRS promoter was significantly higher
than that conferred by the Act1 promoter, regardless of whether seedlings were grown in the dark or under the light/dark cycle
condition (Fig. 7). The luciferase
expression in leaves of seedlings grown under light/dark cycles was
also higher than in leaves grown in the dark within the first week
after germination regardless of whether or not the Act1
promoter contained the Amy3 SRS.

View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
The efficacy of Amy3 SRS
in enhancement of Act1 promoter activity is not
affected by growth conditions of transgenic rice. T3 homozygous
seeds of transgenic lines Act 6-9-1 and Act(SRS) 5-15-1 carrying the
Act1-Luc gene and Act1-3SRS-Luc gene,
respectively, were germinated and grown in the dark (filled
column) or in 12-h light/12-h dark cycles (open column)
for 12 days. Every 2 days, leaves were collected from five seedlings of
each transgenic line and assayed for luciferase activity. Error
bars indicate the standard deviation of luciferase activity in the
five seedlings.
|
|
Enhancement of Act1 Promoter Activity by the aAmy3 SRS Is
Tissue-independent, Whereas That of the Amy8
SRS/GARS Is Tissue-dependent--
The rice
-amylases are encoded by a multigene family (21). In the present
study, we first compared the expression patterns of the -amylase
genes in various rice tissues to understand how they are regulated. As
shown in Fig. 8, the -amylase genes
are differentially expressed in rice suspension cells and germinated seeds. Although expression of all the -amylase genes was enhanced by sugar starvation, the magnitude of enhancement varied from gene to gene (Fig. 8, compare lane 1 with lane
2). All -amylase genes were barely expressed in shoots and
roots, but most of them were expressed in endosperms and embryos of
germinated rice seeds. Both Amy3 and Amy8
were highly expressed in sucrose-starved cells; however, only
Amy8 was highly expressed in endosperms. These results
indicate that Amy3 and Amy8 are
coordinately regulated by sugar in rice suspension cells but
differentially regulated, presumably by GA, in germinating seeds. This
expression of -amylase genes is regulated by GA at the transcription
level in endosperm (22, 23) and by sugars in rice suspension cells (8,
9). The coordinated and differential regulation could be due to the presence of conserved or distinct regulatory elements in the
Amy3 and Amy8 promoters. We therefore
compared the cis-acting elements in the two promoters.

View larger version (76K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
The rice -amylase
genes are differentially expressed in cultured rice suspension cells
and germinated rice seeds. Rice suspension cells were cultured in
sucrose-free ( S) or sucrose-containing (+S)
medium for 2 days and collected. Rice seeds were germinated for 5 days
(5d), and shoots (Sh), roots (Ro),
endosperms (End), and embryos (Em) were
collected. Total RNA was isolated from the collected cells and tissues
and subjected to RNA gel blot analysis using the rice Act1,
Amy8 ( Amy) cDNA, and -amylase gene-specific
DNAs (10) as probes. 0d indicates that embryos were
collected prior to seed germination. The equivalence of RNA loading
among lanes was demonstrated by ethidium bromide staining of
rRNA.
|
|
The rice Amy8 promoter was shown previously to drive
sucrose starvation-induced expression of a reporter gene in rice
suspension cells (8). Sequence analysis revealed that the
Amy8 promoter contains a 31-bp GC box at positions 266
to 236 and a TATCCA element at positions 131 to 126 upstream of
the transcription site (Fig. 1a). The nucleotide sequences
of the Amy3 and Amy8 GC boxes are highly
homologous (Fig. 1b). The 230-bp Amy8
SRS/GARS, which encompasses positions 318 to 89 of the
Amy8 promoter, contains the GC box and TATCCA element
(Fig. 1a). Between the GC box and the TATCCA element, two
additional sequences homologous to the c-Myb-binding site (24) and GARE
(25) are present in the Amy8 SRS/GARS but are absent in
the Amy3 SRS. To test whether the Amy8
SRS/GARS may also serve as an enhancer, this sequence was also inserted
at position 459 of the Act1 promoter and tested for its
effect on Act1 promoter activity in transgenic rice.
The patterns of luciferase expression conferred by the
Act1-3SRS and Act1-8SRS/GARS chimeric promoters
(Fig. 2) in various tissues of transgenic rice seedlings were compared.
T3 homozygous seeds of transgenic lines Act 6-9-1, Act(3SRS) 5-15-1, and Act(8SRS/GARS) 5 were germinated and grown for 8 days. Various
tissues of seedlings were collected and assayed for luciferase
activity. As shown in Fig. 9, the
Amy3 SRS enhanced Act1 promoter activity
significantly in embryos, shoots, and roots, whereas the
Amy8 SRS/GARS enhanced Act1 promoter activity
mainly in endosperms and embryos of germinated seeds and seedlings.

View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 9.
Enhancement of Act1 promoter
activity by Amy3 SRS is tissue-independent, whereas
that of Amy8 SRS/GARS is
tissue-dependent. T3 homozygous seeds of transgenic
lines Act 6-9-1 (open bar), Act(3SRS)5-15-1 (filled
bar), and Act(8SRS/GARS) 5 (stippled bar) were
germinated and grown for 8 days. Each day, endosperms, embryos, shoots,
and roots were collected from five germinating or germinated seeds of
each line and then assayed for luciferase activity.
|
|
The Amy8 SRS/GARS Confers Endosperm- and
Embryo-specific Activity to a Minimal Promoter--
Since the
Amy8 SRS/GARS enhanced Act1 promoter activity
in the endosperm and embryo of germinated seeds and seedlings, we next
wished to determine whether the Amy8 SRS/GARS itself
confers tissue-specific activity to a minimal promoter. The
Amy8 SRS/GARS was fused upstream of the
CaMV35S minimal promoter-Luc fusion gene (Fig.
2), which was then introduced into the rice genome. Several transgenic
rice lines were obtained, and the T2 seeds of one randomly selected
line, T4-12, were germinated for 6 days. Various tissues of germinated
seeds were collected, and luciferase activity was assayed. As shown in
Fig. 10, when compared with the activity in roots, the luciferase activity in endosperms and
embryos was 74- and 20-fold, respectively. The activity in shoots was similar to that in roots. These findings show that the
Amy8 SRS/GARS confers endosperm- and embryo-specific
activity to a minimal promoter in germinated transgenic rice seeds.

View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 10.
The Amy8 SRS/GARS
confers endosperm- and embryo-specific activity to a minimal promoter
in transgenic rice seedlings. T2 seeds of transgenic line T4-12
carrying the 8SRS/GARS-CaMV35S-Luc chimeric gene
(Fig. 2) were germinated in water for 6 days. Endosperms, embryos,
shoots, and roots of five germinated seeds were collected and assayed
for luciferase activity. The value of luciferase activity in roots was
assigned as 1X, and the other values relative to this value
were then calculated. The experiment was repeated three times, and
error bars indicate the standard deviation of luciferase
activity.
|
|
The Amy8 SRS/GARS Confers Sugar and GA
Responsiveness to a Minimal Promoter--
Amy8 was expressed in
sucrose-starved cells and endosperms, suggesting that the Amy8
promoter likely contains regulatory sequences responsible for sugar and
GA responses. We decided to determine whether the Amy8
SRS/GARS confers the sugar and GA responsiveness to a minimal promoter.
Embryos collected from rice seeds pretreated with 2,4-D have been shown
to respond to exogenously applied sugar (26). Therefore, the same batch
of T2 seeds from transgenic line T4-12 used in the experiment
described in Fig. 10 was pretreated with 2,4-D for 8 days. Embryos were
collected and divided into four groups. Each group of embryos was
incubated with or without sucrose plus or minus GA for 2 days, and
luciferase activity was assayed. As shown in Fig.
11a, in the presence of sucrose, luciferase activity in embryos was relatively low regardless of whether GA was present or not. In the absence of both sucrose and
GA, luciferase activity in embryos increased significantly by 5.5-fold.
The addition of GA in the absence of sucrose enhanced luciferase
activity by 8.2-fold.

View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 11.
The Amy8 SRS/GARS
confers sugar and GA responsiveness to a minimal promoter in embryos of
germinated seeds. T2 seeds of transgenic line T4-12 were
incubated in liquid Murashige-Skoog medium containing 2 µg/ml
2,4-D for 8 days (a). Twenty embryos were dissected from the
seeds, collected, and divided into four groups with five embryos in
each group. Each group of embryos was incubated in the presence or
absence of 100 mM sucrose with or without 0.1 µM GA for 2 days, and luciferase activity was assayed.
Embryos were removed from 20 dry T2 seeds of transgenic line T4-12, and
the endosperms were collected (b). Twenty endosperms were
incubated in the presence or absence of 100 µM sucrose
with or without 0.1 µM GA for 2 days, and luciferase
activity was assayed. + and indicate the presence or absence of
sucrose or GA. The value of luciferase activity in embryos or
endosperms in the presence of sucrose but absence of GA was assigned as
1X, and the other values relative to this value were then
calculated. The experiments of panels a and b
were repeated three times, and error bars indicate the
standard deviation of luciferase activity.
|
|
Embryos of T1 seeds from transgenic line T4-12 were removed in order to
cut off the source of GA. The endosperms were then divided into four
groups. Each group of endosperms was incubated with or without sucrose
plus or minus GA for 2 days, and luciferase activity was assayed. As
shown in Fig. 11b, in the absence of GA, the luciferase
activity in endosperms was low regardless of whether sucrose was
present or not. In the presence of both GA and sucrose, the luciferase
activity in endosperms increased by 4-fold, and the removal of sucrose
did not alter the luciferase activity. These results demonstrate that
the Amy8 SRS/GARS confers GA responsiveness to a minimal
promoter in both rice embryos and endosperms.
 |
DISCUSSION |
The Act1-3SRS Promoter Is a Strong Promoter for Foreign Gene
Expression in Transgenic Rice--
The availability of a promoter that
provides reliable high level expression of introduced genes in target
cells is an important issue in plant transformation. The maize
Adh1 promoter, developed as an important promoter for
monocot transformation, has low activity in monocots. A combination of
six copies of the anaerobic responsive element enhancer and four copies
of the octopine synthase enhancer with the maize Adh1
promoter, designated as Emu, significantly enhances the
Adh1 promoter activity in protoplasts of maize, wheat, and
rice in transient assays (27). The rice Act1 and maize
Ubi promoters are now the most frequently used monocot
promoters for monocot transformation. A comparison of promoter strength
indicates that these monocot promoters exert differential strength in
different monocot cells. For example, in barley suspension cells,
Emu activity is 240% of the rice Act1 promoter
and 130% of the maize Ubi promoter (17). However, in rice
and maize suspension cells, Emu activity is only about 60%
of the rice Act1 promoter and 40-50% of the maize
Ubi promoter (17, 18).
In one of our previous studies involving rice protoplast transient
expression assay, three copies of the Amy3 SRS enhanced Act1 promoter activity 20-fold in glucose-starved rice
protoplasts (11). In the present study, in stably transformed rice
suspension cells, the Amy3 SRS enhanced Act1
promoter activity by an average of 3-fold in sucrose-provided cells and
by at least 20-fold in sucrose-starved cells (Fig. 3). The
Amy3 SRS also enhanced Act1 promoter activity
from a fewfold to tens of fold, depending on the type of tissue and the
developmental stage of the transgenic rice assayed (Figs. 5-7). The
enhancement was generally effective for all transformants (Fig. 4).
One-week-old transgenic rice seedlings contain ~50 mM
sugars (data not shown). Such a concentration of sugars is high enough
to suppress -amylase gene expression if it occurs in rice suspension
cells (4). Consequently, the high activity of Act1-SRS in
transgenic rice is not likely due to sugar starvation. The
Act1-SRS promoter activity is higher than the Act1 promoter activity in both sucrose-provided and
sucrose-starved cells (Fig. 3), suggesting that the Amy3
SRS could be a general enhancer regardless of whether sugar is present
or not. The consistent effectiveness of the Amy3 SRS in
enhancing Act1 promoter activity, as determined by both
transient expression and transgenic assays, also suggests that the
Amy3 SRS is a faithful transcriptional enhancer for the
Act1 promoter. The Act1-SRS promoter should be of
value where a high level of foreign gene expression is required in rice
and other monocots. The Act1-SRS promoter could
significantly help in the development of transient expression or stable
transformation procedures, in the repression of endogenous gene
expression through an antisense RNA or RNA interference approach, in
the overproduction of biomolecules or recombinant proteins, and in the
overexpression of disease-, insect-, or stress-resistant genes prior to
the employment of nonconstitutive expression strategies.
The Amy3 SRS Enhances the Endogenous Expression Pattern of the
Act1 Promoter--
The experiments described in both Figs. 5 and 6
show that the activity of the Act1 and Act1-3SRS
promoters fluctuates during the development of transgenic rice. The
promoter activities reached their first peak within 1 week after
germination, declined at week 2 through week 3, and rose again at week
4. The activity profile of the Act1-3SRS was similar to that
of the wild-type Act1 promoter in almost every tissue
throughout their developmental stages, suggesting that the
Amy3 SRS led primarily to an enhancement of the
endogenous expression pattern rather than to constitutive ectopic
expression. Interestingly, the impact of the Amy3 SRS on
the enhancement of the Act1 promoter activity varied from
tissue to tissue. The greatest impact occurred in roots, regardless of the developmental stage of the transgenic rice, and the least impact
occurred in the endosperms of germinated seeds. The Amy3 SRS activity in rice suspension cells is enhanced by sugar starvation. Whether or not the enhancement potential of Amy3
SRS is regulated by sugar levels in other plant tissues remains
to be determined.
Cytoplasmic actin is an essential component of the eukaryotic cell
cytoskeleton and plays an important role in various plant cellular
activities and extension growth (28, 29). Therefore, it is reasonable
to suspect that the Act1 promoter is more active in rapidly
growing cells and tissues than in slowly growing cells and tissues.
Maximal actin mRNA levels have been observed in the young shoots of
rice between 2-4 days old; however, the level began to decline 7 days
after germination (30). The interval between leaf production on the
main culm of rice is shorter during early growth stages (4-5 days
after germination) and longer at later stages (8-9 days after
germination) (31). We normally observed that active tiller (side shoots
produced at the base of a stem) growth in rice plants begins at weeks 3 and 4. These studies indicate that the activity of the Act1
and Act1-3SRS promoters in transgenic rice seedlings
correlates well with seedling vigor, the endogenous actin gene
expression pattern, and the growth rate of transgenic rice. This notion
is further supported by the observation that Act1 and
Act1-3SRS promoter activities are higher in seedlings growing vigorously and healthily under light/dark cycle conditions than
in seedlings growing poorly under continuous darkness (Fig. 7). The
unique feature of the Amy3 SRS in enhancing an endogenous expression pattern rather than inducing constitutive ectopic expression of a monocot promoter is potentially useful for the generation of
activation-tagged mutants of monocots.
The Amy3 SRS and Amy8 SRS/GARS Contain cis-acting Elements
for Differential Expression in Rice--
Amy3 and Amy8 are the
two most abundantly expressed -amylase genes in sucrose-starved rice
suspension cells, and the levels of Amy3 and
Amy8 mRNAs constitute 60 and 30%, respectively, of
total -amylase mRNAs accumulated in sucrose-starved rice
suspension cells (10). The positive correlation between the
transcription rates and steady-state mRNA levels of individual
-amylase genes suggests that transcriptional regulation plays an
important role in the differential expression of -amylase genes in
sucrose-starved rice suspension cells (10). The 105-bp
Amy3 SRS and 230-bp Amy8 SRS/GARS share
conserved and distinct sequences (Fig. 1). The GC box and TATCCA
element are essential for the Amy3 SRS activity in rice
protoplasts under sugar starvation (11). These two elements are also
present in the Amy8 SRS/GARS and are likely responsible
for the sugar responsiveness of Amy8 SRS/GARS in transgenic embryos (Fig. 11). The Amy3 SRS contains two
tandem repeats of the TATCCA element (Fig. 1a), which may be
essential for the high activity of the Amy3 promoter.
Recently, we found that modification of the Amy8 SRS/GARS
by duplicating the TATCCA element also enhances the
Amy8 SRS/GARS activity in rice embryos by
6-fold.2 The G box is also
essential for the activity of the Amy3 SRS under sugar
starvation (11); however, the G box is absent in the Amy8
SRS/GARS (Fig. 1). It remains to be determined whether the G box
provides additional functions for the regulation of Amy3
expression in rice.
The endogenous Amy3 was not at all or only lowly
expressed in the embryos, endosperms, shoots, and roots of germinated
rice seeds (Fig. 8; see also Ref. 3). We also observed that a 1.1-kb Amy3 promoter sequence directed only a very low level of
luciferase expression in these four tissues (data not shown). It is
possible that the Amy3 promoter does not contain
cis-acting elements capable of controlling gene expression in the four
tissues or that a repressor inhibits the Amy3 promoter
activity. Interestingly, the Amy3 SRS enhanced
Act1 promoter activity significantly in the embryo, shoot,
and root (Fig. 9) and weakly in the endosperm (Figs. 5 and 9) of
germinated transgenic rice seeds. This suggests that, if there is a
repressor, the repressor does not act on the 105-bp Amy3
SRS. Although it is likely that the Amy3 SRS mainly
functions as an enhancer, the possibility that the Amy3
SRS contains cis-acting elements capable of controlling gene expression
in the four tissues was not ruled out by the present study. On the
other hand, the Amy8 SRS/GARS enhanced Act1
promoter activity mainly in the endosperm and embryo of germinated rice
seeds (Fig. 9). Fusion of the Amy8 SRS/GARS with the
CaMV35S minimal promoter also led to endosperm- and
embryo-specific expression of luciferase (Fig. 10), which is consistent
with the embryo- and endosperm-specific expression pattern of the
endogenous Amy8 (Fig. 8). These results suggest that the
230-bp Amy8 SRS/GARS contains cis-acting elements
sufficient for directing endosperm- and embryo-specific expression of
promoters. Future functional studies of a linker scan-mutagenized
Amy8 SRS/GARS may lead to identification of these
cis-acting elements responsible for tissue-specific expression.
Cross-talk between the Sugar and GA Signaling Pathways--
The
Amy8 SRS/GARS contains a putative GARE that might be
responsible for the GA inducibility of this promoter sequence in both
rice embryos and endosperms. The Amy8
SRS/GARS-CaMV35S chimeric promoter conferred high luciferase
activity in rice embryos in the absence of both sucrose and GA, but the
addition of GA further enhanced the luciferase activity by only
1.5-fold (from 5.5-fold to 8.2-fold) (Fig. 11). One possible
explanation for the small increase in luciferase by GA is that both
sugar starvation and a saturating level of endogenous GA had already
activated the Amy8 SRS/GARS in the rice embryos.
Consequently, the addition of exogenous GA did not lead to a
significant increase in luciferase activity. Barley embryos have been
shown to contain endogenous GA that activates -amylase expression,
and application of a GA biosynthesis inhibitor to the embryos led to
repression of GA biosynthesis and inhibition of -amylase gene
expression (5, 32).
-Amylase gene expression is sensitive to sugar repression in rice
and barley embryos (4, 5, 32) but not in rice and barley endosperms (5,
34). In the present study, we show that the GA responsiveness of
Amy8 SRS/GARS is suppressed by sugar in rice embryos
(Fig. 11a) but not in rice endosperms (Fig. 11b).
The reason for the sugar insensitivity of -amylase gene promoters in
rice endosperm is not known.
The mechanisms involved in sugar repression of -amylase gene
expression and in the antagonism between sugar and GA for regulation of
-amylase gene expression are not clear. The GARE and the TATCCA element are two essential components of the GA response complex in
-amylase gene promoters (12, 13). GAMyb (HvMYBGa) is an MYB
transcription factor that specifically binds to the GARE present in
GA-inducible promoters, and the expression of HvMYBGa in barley embryos
is induced by GA (33). In the absence of GA, overexpression of HvMYBGa
can activate promoter transcription of the barley high and low pI
-amylase genes (Amy-pHV19 and Amy32b) and
cysteine proteinase gene (EPB-1) in barley aleurone layers
(33-35). Recently, we found that OsMYBS1, which is also an MYB
transcription factor, specifically binds to the TATCCA element
both in vivo and in vitro.3
Expression of OsMYBS1 in rice suspension
cells is suppressed by sugar, and overexpression of OsMYBS1
transactivates the transcription of a promoter containing the
Amy3 SRS in barley aleurone cells under a repressed
condition (in the presence of sugar).3 We also found that
OsMYBS1 acts cooperatively with HvMYBGa to transactivate the
transcription of barley Amy32b and Amy8
SRS/GARS-CaMV35S promoters in barley aleurone layers
under a repressed condition (in the absence of GA).2,3 All
of our studies indicate that the sugar and GA signaling pathway cross-talk in the regulation of downstream -amylase gene expression. Experimental evidence suggesting cross-talk between sugar,
phytohormone, light, and stress signaling pathways is increasing
(37-40). How these signaling pathways communicate is not clear.
Studies on the interaction between HvMYBGa and OsMYBS1 and between
these interacting factors with the cis-acting elements present in the Amy8 SRS/GARS both in vivo and in
vitro may help us better understand the interaction between the
sugar and GA signaling pathways in cereals.
In summary, the present study shows that the Amy3 SRS
functions mainly by enhancing endogenous gene expression patterns, whereas the Amy8 SRS/GARS contains cis-acting elements
that function as sugar-sensitive, GA-dependent, and
tissue-specific transcriptional enhancers in transgenic rice. In the
future, more detailed studies on the essential cis-acting elements
present in these enhancers may facilitate the design of highly active
and tightly regulated composite promoters for special applications in
plant transformation and gene expression in monocots. The present study
provides a system for analyzing the molecular mechanisms of
differential GA- and sugar-dependent gene regulation and
cross-talk between the sugar and GA signaling pathways in cereals.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank Lin-Tze Yu for technical assistance
and Douglas Platt for help in preparation of the manuscript.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by a grant from Academia Sinica,
Grant NSC-90-2311-B-001-008 from the National Science Council, and a
grant from the Biomedical Research Foundation of the Republic of China.The costs of publication of this
article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article
must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement" in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
¶
To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.:
886-2-2788-2695; Fax: 886-2-2788-2695 or 886-2-2782-6085; E-mail:
sumay@ccvax.sinica.edu.tw.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, February 6, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M109722200
2
P.-W. Chen and S.-M. Yu, unpublished results.
3
C.-A. Lu, T.-H. D. Ho, and S.-M. Yu,
submitted for publication.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
GA, gibberellin;
GARE, GA response element;
GARS, GA response sequence;
SRS, sugar response sequence;
2, 4-D, 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic
acid.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Jacobsen, J. V.,
Gubler, F.,
and Chandler, P. M.
(1995)
in
Plant Hormones: Physiology, Biochemistry, and Molecular Biology
(Davies, P. J., ed)
, pp. 247-271, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA
|
| 2.
|
Yu, S. M.,
Kuo, Y. H.,
Sheu, G.,
Sheu, Y. J.,
and Liu, L. F.
(1991)
J. Biol. Chem.
266,
21131-21137[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 3.
|
Yu, S. M.,
Tzou, W. S., Lo, W. S.,
Kuo, Y. H.,
Lee, H. T.,
and Wu, R.
(1992)
Gene (Amst.)
122,
247-253[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 4.
|
Yu, S. M.,
Lee, Y. C.,
Fang, S. C.,
Chan, M. T.,
Hwa, S. F.,
and Liu, L. F.
(1996)
Plant Mol. Biol.
30,
1277-1289[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 5.
|
Perata, P.,
Matsukura, C.,
Vernieri, P.,
and Yamaguchi, J.
(1997)
Plant Cell
9,
2197-2208[Abstract]
|
| 6.
|
Yu, S. M.
(1999)
in
Molecular Biology of Rice
(Shimamoto, K., ed)
, pp. 161-178, Springer-Verlag, Tokyo
|
| 7.
|
Yu, S. M.
(1999)
Plant Physiol.
121,
687-693[Free Full Text]
|
| 8.
|
Chan, M. T.,
Chao, Y. C.,
and Yu, S. M.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
17635-17641[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 9.
|
Sheu, J. J.,
Jan, S. P.,
Lee, H. T.,
and Yu, S. M.
(1994)
Plant J.
5,
655-664[CrossRef]
|
| 10.
|
Sheu, J. J., Yu, T. S.,
Tong, W. F.,
and Yu, S. M.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
26998-27004[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 11.
|
Lu, C. A.,
Lim, E. K.,
and Yu, S. M.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
10120-10131[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 12.
|
Gubler, F.,
and Jacobsen, J. V.
(1992)
Plant Cell
4,
1435-1441[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 13.
|
Lanahan, M. B., Ho, T. H.,
Rogers, S. W.,
and Rogers, J. C.
(1992)
Plant Cell
4,
203-211[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 14.
|
Zhang, W.,
McElroy, D.,
and Wu, R.
(1991)
Plant Cell
3,
1155-1165[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 15.
|
Christensen, A. H.,
Sharrock, R. A.,
and Quail, P. H.
(1992)
Plant Mol. Biol.
18,
675-689[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 16.
|
McElroy, D.,
and Brettell, R. I. S.
(1994)
Trends Biotechnol
12,
62-68[CrossRef]
|
| 17.
|
Schledzewski, K.,
and Mendel, R. R.
(1994)
Transgenic Res
3,
249-255
|
| 18.
|
Wilmink, A.,
van de Ven, B. C.,
and Dons, J. J.
(1995)
Plant Mol. Biol.
28,
949-955[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 19.
|
Olive, M. R.,
Walker, J. C.,
Singh, K.,
Dennis, E. S.,
and Peacock, W. J.
(1990)
Plant Mol. Biol.
15,
593-604[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 20.
|
Ellis, J. G.,
Llewellyn, D. J.,
Walker, J. C.,
Dennis, E. S.,
and Peacock, W. J.
(1987)
EMBO J.
6,
3203-3208[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 21.
|
Thomas, B. R.,
and Rodriguez, R. L.
(1994)
Plant Physiol.
106,
1235-1239[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 22.
|
Jacobsen, J. V.,
and Beach, L. R.
(1985)
Nature
316,
275-277[CrossRef]
|
| 23.
|
Zwar, J. V.,
and Hooley, R.
(1986)
Plant Physiol.
80,
459-463[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 24.
|
Nakagoshi, H.,
Nagase, T.,
Kanei-Ishii, C.,
Ueno, Y.,
and Ishii, S.
(1990)
J. Biol. Chem.
265,
3479-3483[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 25.
|
Gubler, F.,
Raventos, D.,
Keys, M.,
Watts, R.,
Mundy, J.,
and Jacobsen, J. V.
(1999)
Plant J.
17,
1-9[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 26.
|
Umemura, T.,
Perata, P.,
Futsuhara, Y.,
and Yamaguchi, J.
(1998)
Planta
204,
420-428[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 27.
|
Last, D. I.,
Brettell, R. I. S.,
Chamberlain, D. A.,
Chaudhury, A. M.,
Larkin, P. J.,
Marsh, E. L.,
Peacock, W. J.,
and Dennis, E. S.
(1991)
Theor. Appl. Genet.
81,
581-588
|
| 28.
|
Staiger, C. J.,
and Schliwa, M.
(1987)
Protoplasma
141,
1-12
|
| 29.
|
Seagull, R. W.
(1989)
CRC Rev. Plant Sci.
8,
131-167
|
| 30.
|
McElroy, D.,
Rothenberg, M.,
Reece, K. S.,
and Wu, R.
(1990)
Plant Mol. Biol.
15,
257-268[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 31.
|
Vergara, B. S.
(1980)
in
Rice: Production and Utilization
(Luh, B. S., ed)
, pp. 75-86, AVI Publishing Co, Inc., Westport, CT
|
| 32.
|
Loreti, E.,
Matsukura, C.,
Gubler, F.,
Alpi, A.,
Yamaguchi, J.,
and Perata, P.
(2000)
Plant Mol. Biol.
44,
85-90[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 33.
|
Gubler, F.,
Kalla, R.,
Roberts, J. K.,
and Jacobsen, J. V.
(1995)
Plant Cell
7,
1879-1891[Abstract]
|
| 34.
|
Cercos, M.,
Gomez-Cadenas, A.,
and Ho, T. H.
(1999)
Plant J.
19,
107-118[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 35.
|
Gomez-Cadenas, A.,
Zentella, R.,
Walker-Simmons, M. K.,
and Ho, T. H.
(2001)
Plant Cell
13,
667-679[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 36.
|
Hiei, Y.,
Ohta, S.,
Komari, T.,
and Kumashiro, T.
(1994)
Plant J.
6,
271-282[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 37.
|
Sheen, J.,
Zhou, L. i.,
and Jang, J. C.
(1999)
Curr. Opin. Plant Biol.
2,
410-418[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 38.
|
Gibson, S. I.
(2000)
Plant Physiol.
124,
1532-1539[Free Full Text]
|
| 39.
|
Ho, S. L.,
Tong, W. F.,
and Yu, S. M.
(2000)
Plant Physiol.
122,
57-66[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 40.
|
Smeekens, S.
(2000)
Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol.
51,
49-81[CrossRef]
|
| 41.
|
Toki, S.
(1997)
Plant Mol. Biol. Rep.
5,
16-21
|
| 42.
|
Cao, J.,
Duan, X.,
McElroy, D.,
and Wu, R.
(1992)
Plant Cell Rep.
11,
586-591
|
| 43.
|
Luehrsen, K. R.,
de Wet, J. R.,
and Walbot, V.
(1992)
Methods Enzymol.
216,
397-414[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 44.
|
Hood, E. E.,
Helmer, G. L.,
Fraley, R. T.,
and Chilton, M. D.
(1986)
J. Bacteriol.
168,
1291-1301[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
Copyright © 2002 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
C.-A. Lu, C.-C. Lin, K.-W. Lee, J.-L. Chen, L.-F. Huang, S.-L. Ho, H.-J. Liu, Y.-I. Hsing, and S.-M. Yu
The SnRK1A Protein Kinase Plays a Key Role in Sugar Signaling during Germination and Seedling Growth of Rice
PLANT CELL,
August 1, 2007;
19(8):
2484 - 2499.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
P.-W. Chen, C.-M. Chiang, T.-H. Tseng, and S.-M. Yu
Interaction between Rice MYBGA and the Gibberellin Response Element Controls Tissue-Specific Sugar Sensitivity of {alpha}-Amylase Genes
PLANT CELL,
September 1, 2006;
18(9):
2326 - 2340.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. I. Gibson
Sugar and phytohormone response pathways: navigating a signalling network
J. Exp. Bot.,
January 2, 2004;
55(395):
253 - 264.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 2002 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
|