4.1 Article

Expressional diversity of wheat nsLTP genes: evidence of subfunctionalization via cis-regulatory divergence

期刊

GENETICA
卷 138, 期 8, 页码 843-852

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10709-010-9467-7

关键词

cis-element; Evolution; Gene family; Non-specific lipid transfer protein; Subfunctionalization

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Science and Technology [2009-0064150]
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea [2009-0064150] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Previously, the wheat non-specific lipid transfer proteins (TaLTP), members of a small multigene family, were reported to evidence a complex pattern of expression regulation. In order to assess further the expression diversity of the TaLTP genes, we have attempted to evaluate their expression profiles in responses to abiotic stresses, using semi-quantitative RT-PCR. The expression profiles generated herein revealed that the TaLTP genes in group A evidenced highly similar responses against abiotic stresses, whereas differential expression patterns among genes in each group were also observed. A total of seven promoters were fused to a GUS reporter gene and the recombinants were introduced into Arabidopsis, while three promoters evidenced non-detectible GUS activity. The promoters of TaLTP1, TaLTP7, and TaLTP10 included in group A drove strong expressions during plant development with overlapping patterns, in large part, but also exhibited distinct expression pattern, thereby suggesting subfunctionalization processing over evolutionary time. However, only trace expression in cotyledons, young emerged leaves, and epidermal cell layers of flower ovaries was driven by the promoter of TaLTP3 of group B. These results indicate that their distinct physiological functions appear to be accomplished by a subfunctionalization process involving degenerative mutations in regulatory regions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据