Background: How plants respond to dehydration stress has been extensively researched. However, how plants respond to multiple consecutive stresses is virtually unknown. Pre-exposure to various abiotic stresses (including dehydration) may alter plants’ subsequent responses by improving resistance to future exposures. These observations have led to the concept of ‘stress memory’ implying that during subsequent exposures plants provide responses that are different from those during their first encounter with the stress. Genes that provide altered responses in a subsequent stress define the ‘memory genes’ category; genes responding similarly to each stress form the ‘non-memory’ category. Results: Using a genome-wide RNA-Seq approach we determine the transcriptional responses of Arabidopsis plants that have experienced multiple exposures to dehydration stress and compare them with the transcriptional behavior of plants encountering the stress for the first time. The major contribution of this study is the revealed existence of four distinct, previously unknown, transcription memory response patterns of dehydration stress genes in A.thaliana. The biological relevance for each of the four memory types is considered in the context of four overlapping strategies employed by a plant to improve its stress tolerance and/or survival: 1) increased synthesis of protective, damage-repairing, and detoxifying functions; 2) coordinating photosynthesis and growth under repetitive stress; 3) re-adjusting osmotic and ionic equilibrium to maintain homeostasis; and 4) re-adjusting interactions between dehydration and other stress/hormone regulated pathways. Conclusions: The results reveal the unknown, hitherto, existence of four distinct transcription memory response types in a plant and provide genome-wide characterization of memory and non-memory dehydration stress response genes in A.thaliana. The transcriptional responses during repeated exposures to stress are different from known responses occurring during a single exposure. GO analyses of encoded proteins suggested implications for the cellular/organismal protective, adaptive, and survival functions encoded by the memory genes. The results add a new dimension to our understanding of plants’ responses to dehydration stress and to current models for interactions between different signaling systems when adjusting to repeated spells of water deficits.

Pre-exposing plants to diverse abiotic stresses may alter their physiological and transcriptional responses to a subsequent stress, suggesting a form of “stress memory”. Arabidopsis thaliana plants that have experienced multiple exposures to dehydration stress display transcriptional behavior suggesting “memory” from an earlier stress. Genes that respond to a first stress by up-regulating or down-regulating their transcription but in a subsequent stress provide a significantly different response define the ‘memory genes’ category. Genes responding similarly to each stress form the ‘non-memory’ category. It is unknown whether such memory responses exists in other Angiosperm lineages and whether memory is an evolutionarily conserved response to repeated dehydration stresses. Here, we determine the transcriptional responses of maize (Zea mays L.) plants that have experienced repeated exposures to dehydration stress in comparison with plants encountering the stress for the first time. Four distinct transcription memory response patterns similar to those displayed by A. thaliana were revealed. The most important contribution is the evidence that monocot and eudicot plants, two lineages that have diverged 140 to 200 M years ago, display similar abilities to ‘remember’ a dehydration stress and to modify their transcriptional responses, accordingly. The highly sensitive RNA-Seq analyses allowed to identify genes that function similarly in the two lineages, as well as genes that function in species-specific ways. Memory transcription patterns indicate that the transcriptional behavior of responding genes under repeated stresses is different from the behavior during an initial dehydration stress, suggesting that stress memory is a complex phenotype resulting from coordinated responses of multiple signaling pathways. Structurally related genes displaying the same memory responses in the two species would suggest conservation of the genes’ memory during the evolution of plants’ dehydration stress response systems. On the other hand, divergent transcription memory responses by genes encoding similar functions would suggest occurrence of species-specific memory responses. The results provide novel insights into our current knowledge of how plants respond to multiple dehydration stresses, as compared to a single exposure, and may serve as a reference platform to study the functions of memory genes in adaptive responses to water deficit in monocot and eudicot plants.

H3K27me3 deposition at FLC requires FCA- COOLAIR binding; SSU72 antagonizes this binding, thus reducing H3K27me3 deposition at FLC .

Phosphorylation of H2A at serine 95, a plant-specific modification in the histone core domain, is required for flowering time regulation and deposition of the h

Flowering time (heading date) and panicle branch number are important agronomic traits that determine yield in rice (Oryza sativa). The activation of flowering requires histone methylation, but the roles of trimethylation of Lys 4 of histone 3 (H3K4me3) in modulating heading date and panicle development are unclear. Here, we showed that the COMPASS-like complex promotes flowering and panicle branching. The rice (Oryza sativa) WD40 protein OsWDR5a interacts with the TRITHORAX-like protein OsTrx1/SET domain group protein 723 (SDG723) to form the core components of the COMPASS-like complex. Plants in which OsWDR5a or OsTrx1 expression was decreased by RNA interference produced fewer secondary branches and less grain and exhibited a delayed heading date under long-day and short-day conditions, whereas loss of OsWDR5a function resulted in embryo lethality. OsWDR5a binds to Early heading date 1 to regulate its H3K4me3 and expression levels. Together, our results show that the COMPASS-like complex promotes flowering and panicle development and suggest that modulation of H3K4me3 levels by the COMPASS-like complex is critical for rice development.

Summary: Flowering time (heading date) in rice (Oryza sativa) is an important agronomic trait that determines yield. The levels of histone H3 lysine 4 trimethylation (H3K4me3) modulated by TRITHORAX‐like proteins regulate gene transcription, flowering time and environmental stress responses. However, plant TRITHORAX‐like proteins have no known DNA‐binding domain, and therefore the mechanism that gives sequence specificity to these proteins remains unclear. Here, we show that the rice TRITHORAX‐like protein OsTrx1 is recruited to its target, Early heading date 1 (Ehd1), by the C2H2 zinc finger protein SDG723/OsTrx1/OsSET33 Interaction Protein 1 (SIP1). SIP1 binds to the promoter of Ehd1 and interacts with OsTrx1. Mutations in SIP1 led to a late heading date under long‐day and short‐day conditions. Defects in OsTrx1 or SIP1 led to reduced H3K4me3 levels at Ehd1, thus reducing Ehd1 expression. Together, our results show that the transcription factor SIP1 interacts with OxTrx1, allowing OsTrx1 to specifically target Ehd1, altering H3K4me3 levels, increasing Ehd1 expression and thereby promoting flowering.