The Pseudo-Response Regulator
            <i>Ppd-H1</i>
            Provides Adaptation to Photoperiod in Barley

Turner, Adrian P.; Beales, James; Faure, Sébastien; Dunford, Roy P.; Laurie, D. A.

doi:10.1126/science.1117619

Cited by 844 publications

(960 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

892

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The location and action of this QTL corresponds to Ppd-H1. Indeed, a study by Turner et al (2005) demonstrated that cultivars carrying the dominant Ppd-H1 allele flower 20 days earlier than cultivars carrying the recessive ppd-H1 allele, further supporting our conclusion. This study detected both Ppd-H1 and Ppd-H2 in the 12 h treatment (Table 1).…”

Section: Photoperiod Sensitive Genessupporting

confidence: 78%

“…Particular photoperiod responsiveness has been selected for in many crops to adapt the plants to specific environments and farming practices (Turner et al 2005). Barley is a long-day photoperiod plant, so that its transition to reproductive growth is significantly delayed when grown under short day conditions (Laurie 1997, Stockinger et al 2007.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The photoperiod response gene Ppd-H1, located on chromosome arm 2HS, regulates flowering time under long days, while Ppd-H2 on chromosome arm 1HL functions only under short days (Laurie et al 1995). Ppd-H1 encodes a pseudo-response regulator (PRR) (Turner et al 2005), which is different from the major photoperiod response genes Hd1 and Hd3a in rice (Kojima et al 2002, Yano et al 2000. Ppd-H2 encodes HvFT3, an FT-like gene (Faure et al 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Detection of photoperiod responsive and non-responsive flowering time QTL in barley

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A QTL analysis was performed to determine the inheritance of flowering time in barley, using a set of recombinant inbred lines developed from a winter-type × spring-type cross. Two photoperiod responsive loci, Ppd-H1 and Ppd-H2, were detected on chromosome arms 2HS and 1HL respectively. Segregation for eam8 (mapping to the terminus of chromosome arm 1HL) and Eam5 (close to Sgh2 on chromosome arm 5HL) was also observed. These latter two genes functioned under 12 h to 24 h photoperiods. In addition, eps2S and eps7S, known to lie on chromosome arms 2HS and 7HS respectively, were detected. A new QTL for flowering time, qDHE.ak-1HS, was mapped 23 cM from the terminus of chromosome 1HS, and appears to be expressed under extremely short day lengths.

show abstract

Section: Photoperiod Sensitive Genessupporting

confidence: 78%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Detection of photoperiod responsive and non-responsive flowering time QTL in barley

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3A). In comparison, expression of HvFT, a key gene in the photoperiod response pathway (Turner et al, 2005), was strongly induced by the long-day treatment (Fig. 3B).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Short Vegetative Phase-Like MADS-Box Genes Inhibit Floral Meristem Identity in Barley

Tadege²,

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Analysis of the functions of Short Vegetative Phase (SVP)-like MADS-box genes in barley (Hordeum vulgare) indicated a role in determining meristem identity. Three SVP-like genes are expressed in vegetative tissues of barley: Barley MADS1 (BM1), BM10, and Vegetative to Reproductive Transition gene 2. These genes are induced by cold but are repressed during floral development. Ectopic expression of BM1 inhibited spike development and caused floral reversion in barley, with florets at the base of the spike replaced by tillers. Head emergence was delayed in plants that ectopically express BM1, primarily by delayed development after the floral transition, but expression levels of the barley VRN1 gene (HvVRN1) were not affected. Ectopic expression of BM10 inhibited spike development and caused partial floral reversion, where florets at the base of the spike were replaced by inflorescence-like structures, but did not affect heading date. Floral reversion occurred more frequently when BM1 and BM10 ectopic expression lines were grown in short-day conditions. BM1 and BM10 also inhibited floral development and caused floral reversion when expressed in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana). We conclude that SVP-like genes function to suppress floral meristem identity in winter cereals.During the life cycle of a plant, the shoot apical meristem progresses through three phases of development: vegetative, inflorescence, and floral (Poethig, 1990). In each phase, the apical meristem produces a different set of organs. The vegetative meristem produces leaves, the inflorescence meristem produces leaves and floral meristems to form the inflorescence, and the floral meristem produces the organs that form the flower. The different phases of meristem development are controlled by genes that establish and maintain meristem identity.The shift from vegetative to inflorescence meristem identity, the floral transition, marks the beginning of the reproductive growth phase and is an important determinant of flowering time. In Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), the Short Vegetative Phase (SVP) gene encodes a MADS-box transcription factor that delays the floral transition (Hartmann et al., 2000). Mutations that disrupt SVP cause early flowering (Hartmann et al., 2000), whereas ectopic expression of SVP results in late flowering. Ectopic expression of SVP also inhibits floral meristem identity, causing floral abnormalities such as the conversion of sepals and petals to leaf-like structures (Brill and Watson, 2004;Masiero et al., 2004) and causing inflorescence-like structures to develop within flowers (Brill and Watson, 2004). The development of inflorescences within flowers indicates that meristematic cells within the flower have lost floral identity and have formed an inflorescence instead of floral organs, a phenomenon known as floral reversion (Tooke et al., 2005). Presumably, ectopic expression of SVP causes floral reversion by interfering with a mechanism that maintains floral meristem identity.The Arabidopsis gene, AGAMOUS-LIKE 24 (AGL24)...

show abstract

“…In A. thaliana, they appear to influence the time‐keeping mechanism associated with CO transcription in the photoperiodic flowering pathway indirectly through their role in the circadian clock (Nakamichi et al , 2007; Ito et al , 2008). On the other hand, in crops such as barley and rice, their effects on CO transcription are relatively weak, whereas they strongly affect FT transcription (Turner et al , 2005; Campoli et al , 2012; Koo et al , 2013). Therefore, these PRRs are likely to have a more direct effect on the regulation of the photoperiodic flowering pathway.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

PSEUDO RESPONSE REGULATORs stabilize CONSTANS protein to promote flowering in response to day length

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Seasonal reproduction in many organisms requires detection of day length. This is achieved by integrating information on the light environment with an internal photoperiodic time‐keeping mechanism. Arabidopsis thaliana promotes flowering in response to long days (LDs), and CONSTANS (CO) transcription factor represents a photoperiodic timer whose stability is higher when plants are exposed to light under LDs. Here, we show that PSEUDO RESPONSE REGULATOR (PRR) proteins directly mediate this stabilization. PRRs interact with and stabilize CO at specific times during the day, thereby mediating its accumulation under LDs. PRR‐mediated stabilization increases binding of CO to the promoter of FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT), leading to enhanced FT transcription and early flowering under these conditions. PRRs were previously reported to contribute to timekeeping by regulating CO transcription through their roles in the circadian clock. We propose an additional role for PRRs in which they act upon CO protein to promote flowering, directly coupling information on light exposure to the timekeeper and allowing recognition of LDs.

show abstract

The Pseudo-Response Regulator Ppd-H1 Provides Adaptation to Photoperiod in Barley

Cited by 844 publications

References 20 publications

Detection of photoperiod responsive and non-responsive flowering time QTL in barley

Detection of photoperiod responsive and non-responsive flowering time QTL in barley

Short Vegetative Phase-Like MADS-Box Genes Inhibit Floral Meristem Identity in Barley

PSEUDO RESPONSE REGULATORs stabilize CONSTANS protein to promote flowering in response to day length

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About