1. Plant Biology
Download icon

The role of APETALA1 in petal number robustness

  1. Marie Monniaux
  2. Bjorn Pieper
  3. Sarah M McKim
  4. Anne-Lise Routier-Kierzkowska
  5. Daniel Kierzkowski
  6. Richard S Smith
  7. Angela Hay  Is a corresponding author
  1. Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research, Germany
  2. University of Oxford, United Kingdom
Research Article
  • Cited 11
  • Views 2,814
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2018;7:e39399 doi: 10.7554/eLife.39399

Abstract

Invariant floral forms are important for reproductive success and robust to natural perturbations. Petal number, for example, is invariant in Arabidopsis thaliana flowers. However, petal number varies in the closely related species Cardamine hirsuta, and the genetic basis for this difference between species is unknown. Here we show that divergence in the pleiotropic floral regulator APETALA1 (AP1) can account for the species-specific difference in petal number robustness. This large effect of AP1 is explained by epistatic interactions: A. thaliana AP1 confers robustness by masking the phenotypic expression of quantitative trait loci controlling petal number in C. hirsuta. We show that C. hirsuta AP1 fails to complement this function of A. thaliana AP1, conferring variable petal number, and that upstream regulatory regions of AP1 contribute to this divergence. Moreover, variable petal number is maintained in C. hirsuta despite sufficient standing genetic variation in natural accessions to produce plants with four-petalled flowers.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Marie Monniaux

    Department of Comparative Development and Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research, Cologne, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Bjorn Pieper

    Department of Comparative Development and Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research, Cologne, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Sarah M McKim

    Plant Sciences Department, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Anne-Lise Routier-Kierzkowska

    Department of Comparative Development and Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research, Cologne, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Daniel Kierzkowski

    Department of Comparative Development and Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research, Cologne, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Richard S Smith

    Department of Comparative Development and Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research, Cologne, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9220-0787
  7. Angela Hay

    Department of Comparative Development and Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research, Cologne, Germany
    For correspondence
    hay@mpipz.mpg.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4609-5490

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/H01313X/1)

  • Angela Hay

Human Frontier Science Program (RGP0008/2013)

  • Richard S Smith

Royal Society (University Research Fellowship)

  • Angela Hay

Max Planck Society (W2 Minerva Fellowship)

  • Angela Hay

European Molecular Biology Organization (Long Term Fellowship)

  • Marie Monniaux

National Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada (Post-Doctoral Fellowship)

  • Sarah M McKim

European Molecular Biology Organization (Long Term Fellowship)

  • Sarah M McKim

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Sheila McCormick, University of California-Berkeley, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: June 23, 2018
  2. Accepted: October 11, 2018
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: October 18, 2018 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: October 29, 2018 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2018, Monniaux et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,814
    Page views
  • 481
    Downloads
  • 11
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, Scopus, PubMed Central.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Further reading

    1. Plant Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Meijing Li et al.
    Research Article

    Phycobilisome (PBS) is the main light-harvesting antenna in cyanobacteria and red algae. How PBS transfers the light energy to photosystem II (PSII) remains to be elucidated. Here we report the in situ structure of the PBS–PSII supercomplex from Porphyridium purpureum UTEX 2757 using cryo-electron tomography and subtomogram averaging. Our work reveals the organized network of hemiellipsoidal PBS with PSII on the thylakoid membrane in the native cellular environment. In the PBS–PSII supercomplex, each PBS interacts with six PSII monomers, of which four directly bind to the PBS, and two bind indirectly. Additional three ‘connector’ proteins also contribute to the connections between PBS and PSIIs. Two PsbO subunits from adjacent PSII dimers bind with each other, which may promote stabilization of the PBS–PSII supercomplex. By analyzing the interaction interface between PBS and PSII, we reveal that αLCM and ApcD connect with CP43 of PSII monomer and that αLCM also interacts with CP47' of the neighboring PSII monomer, suggesting the multiple light energy delivery pathways. The in situ structures illustrate the coupling pattern of PBS and PSII and the arrangement of the PBS–PSII supercomplex on the thylakoid, providing the near-native 3D structural information of the various energy transfer from PBS to PSII.

    1. Plant Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Zachary Dobson et al.
    Research Article Updated

    Photosynthetic organisms have adapted to survive a myriad of extreme environments from the earth’s deserts to its poles, yet the proteins that carry out the light reactions of photosynthesis are highly conserved from the cyanobacteria to modern day crops. To investigate adaptations of the photosynthetic machinery in cyanobacteria to excessive light stress, we isolated a new strain of cyanobacteria, Cyanobacterium aponinum 0216, from the extreme light environment of the Sonoran Desert. Here we report the biochemical characterization and the 2.7 Å resolution structure of trimeric photosystem I from this high-light-tolerant cyanobacterium. The structure shows a new conformation of the PsaL C-terminus that supports trimer formation of cyanobacterial photosystem I. The spectroscopic analysis of this photosystem I revealed a decrease in far-red absorption, which is attributed to a decrease in the number of long- wavelength chlorophylls. Using these findings, we constructed two chimeric PSIs in Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803 demonstrating how unique structural features in photosynthetic complexes can change spectroscopic properties, allowing organisms to thrive under different environmental stresses.