| Title |
Genetic evidence suggests that GIS functions downstream of TCL1 to regulate trichome formation in Arabidopsis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Plant Biology, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12870-018-1271-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Na Zhang, Li Yang, Sha Luo, Xutong Wang, Wei Wang, Yuxin Cheng, Hainan Tian, Kaijie Zheng, Ling Cai, Shucai Wang |
| Abstract |
Trichome formation in Arabidopsis is regulated by a MBW complex formed by MYB, bHLH and WD40 transcriptional factors, which can activate GLABRA2 (GL2) and the R3 MYB transcription factor genes. GL2 promotes trichome formation, whereas R3 MYBs are able to block the formation of the MBW complex. It has been reported that the C2H2 transcription factor GIS (GLABROUS INFLORESCENCE STEMS) functions upstream of the MBW activator complex to regulate trichome formation, and that the expression of TCL1 is not regulated by the MBW complex. However, gis and the R3 MYB gene mutant tcl1 (trichomeless 1) have opposite inflorescence trichome phenotypes, but their relationship in regulating trichome formation remained unknown. By generating and characterization of the gis tcl1 double mutant, we found that trichome formation in the gis tcl1double and the tcl1 single mutants were largely indistinguishable, but the trichome formation in the 35S:TCL1/gis transgenic plant was similar to that in the gis mutant. By using quantitative RT-PCR analysis, we showed that expression level of GIS was increased in the triple mutant tcl1 try cpc, but the expression level of TCL1 was not affected in the gis mutant. On the other hand, trichome morphology in both gis tcl1 and 35S:TCL1/gis plants was similar to that in the gis mutant. In summary, our results indicate that GIS may work downstream of TCL1 to regulate trichome formation, and GIS has a dominant role in controlling trichome morphology. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 6 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 45% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 9% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 6 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 November 2018.
All research outputs
#14,027,062
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Plant Biology
#998
of 3,322 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,192
of 330,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Plant Biology
#9
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,322 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,121 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.