GH3 genes are main components of the hormonal mechanism regulating growth and development and, hence, are deeply involved in a broad range of physiological processes. They are implicated in hormonal homeostasis through the conjugation to amino acids of the free form of essential plant growth regulators such as indoleacetic and jasmonic acids. In this work, we showed that OsGH3.1 overexpression in rice caused dwarfism and significantly reduced both free auxin content and cell elongation. Functional classification of the transcriptomic profiling revealed that most genes involved in auxin biosynthesis and auxin signaling inhibition were induced and repressed, respectively. Many genes related to cell organization and biogenesis were also significantly downregulated. The survey also showed that, although the response to abiotic stresses was not clearly stimulated, OsGH3.1 overexpression did activate a significant number of defense-related genes. In successive bioassays, it was demonstrated that the resistance of rice plants to pathogen infection, evaluated with two different Magnaporthe grisea strains, was higher in the transformants overexpressing OsGH3.1. Taken together, these results indicate that OsGH3.1 overexpression reduces auxin content, inhibits cell growth and cell wall loosening, and enhances resistance to a fungal pathogen. Our results provide evidence that auxin homeostasis can regulate the activation of the defense response in rice.

Flowering of Arabidopsis thaliana is induced by exposure to long days (LDs). During this process, the shoot apical meristem is converted to an inflorescence meristem that forms flowers, and this transition is maintained even if plants are returned to short days (SDs). We show that exposure to five LDs is sufficient to commit the meristem of SD-grown plants to flower as if they were exposed to continuous LDs. The MADS box proteins SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION OF CONSTANS1 (SOC1) and FRUITFULL (FUL) play essential roles in this commitment process and in the induction of flowering downstream of the transmissible FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT) signal. We exploited laser microdissection and Solexa sequencing to identify 202 genes whose transcripts increase in the meristem during floral commitment. Expression of six of these transcripts was tested in different mutants, allowing them to be assigned to FT-dependent or FT-independent pathways. Most, but not all, of those dependent on FT and its paralog TWIN SISTER OF FT (TSF) also relied on SOC1 and FUL. However, this dependency on FT and TSF or SOC1 and FUL was often bypassed in the presence of the short vegetative phase mutation. FLOR1, which encodes a leucine-rich repeat protein, was induced in the early inflorescence meristem, and flor1 mutations delayed flowering. Our data contribute to the definition of LD-dependent pathways downstream and in parallel to FT.

Bud dormancy is an adaptive process that allows trees to survive the hard environmental conditions that they experience during the winter of temperate climates. Dormancy is characterized by the reduction in meristematic activity and the absence of visible growth. A prolonged exposure to cold temperatures is required to allow the bud resuming growth in response to warm temperatures. In fruit tree species, the dormancy cycle is believed to be regulated by a group of genes encoding MADS-box transcription factors. These genes are called DORMANCY-ASSOCIATED MADS-BOX (DAM) and are phylogenetically related to the Arabidopsis thaliana floral regulators SHORT VEGETATIVE PHASE (SVP) and AGAMOUS-LIKE 24. The interest in DAM and other orthologs of SVP (SVP-like) genes has notably increased due to the publication of several reports suggesting their role in the control of bud dormancy in numerous fruit species, including apple, pear, peach, Japanese apricot, and kiwifruit among others. In this review, we briefly describe the physiological bases of the dormancy cycle and how it is genetically regulated, with a particular emphasis on DAM and SVP-like genes. We also provide a detailed report of the most recent advances about the transcriptional regulation of these genes by seasonal cues, epigenetics and plant hormones. From this information, we propose a tentative classification of DAM and SVP-like genes based on their seasonal pattern of expression. Furthermore, we discuss the potential biological role of DAM and SVP-like genes in bud dormancy in antagonizing the function of FLOWERING LOCUS T-like genes. Finally, we draw a global picture of the possible role of DAM and SVP-like genes in the bud dormancy cycle and propose a model that integrates these genes in a molecular network of dormancy cycle regulation in temperate fruit trees.

Arabidopsis FT protein is a component of florigen, which transmits photoperiodic flowering signals from leaf companion cells to the shoot apex. Here, we show that FT specifically binds phosphatidylcholine (PC) in vitro. A transgenic approach to increase PC levels in vivo in the shoot meristem accelerates flowering whereas reduced PC levels delay flowering, demonstrating that PC levels are correlated with flowering time. The early flowering is related to FT activity, because expression of FT-effector genes is increased in these plants. Simultaneous increase of FT and PC in the shoot apical meristem further stimulates flowering, whereas a loss of FT function leads to an attenuation of the effect of increased PC. Specific molecular species of PC oscillate diurnally, and night-dominant species are not the preferred ligands of FT. Elevating night-dominant species during the day delays flowering. We suggest that FT binds to diurnally changing molecular species of PC to promote flowering.

Background: MADS-domain transcription factors play important roles during plant development. The Arabidopsis MADS-box gene SHORT VEGETATIVE PHASE (SVP) is a key regulator of two developmental phases. It functions as a repressor of the floral transition during the vegetative phase and later it contributes to the specification of floral meristems. How these distinct activities are conferred by a single transcription factor is unclear, but interactions with other MADS domain proteins which specify binding to different genomic regions is likely one mechanism. Results: To compare the genome-wide DNA binding profile of SVP during vegetative and reproductive development we performed ChIP-seq analyses. These ChIP-seq data were combined with tiling array expression analysis, induction experiments and qRT-PCR to identify biologically relevant binding sites. In addition, we compared genome-wide target genes of SVP with those published for the MADS domain transcription factors FLC and AP1, which interact with SVP during the vegetative and reproductive phases, respectively. Conclusions: Our analyses resulted in the identification of pathways that are regulated by SVP including those controlling meristem development during vegetative growth and flower development whereas floral transition pathways and hormonal signaling were regulated predominantly during the vegetative phase. Thus, SVP regulates many developmental pathways, some of which are common to both of its developmental roles whereas others are specific to only one of them.