Abstract
Over the past decade, integrated genetic, cellular, proteomic and genomic approaches have begun to unravel the surprisingly crosstalk between photoreceptors and sugar signaling in regulation of floral signal transduction. Although a number of physiological factors in the pathway have been identified, the molecular genetic interactions of some components are less well understood. The further elucidation of the crosstalk mechanisms between photoreceptors and sugar signaling will certainly contribute to our better understanding of the developmental circuitry that controls floral signal transduction. This article summarizes our current knowledge of this crosstalk, which has not received much attention, and suggests possible directions for future research.
Introduction: light, sugars and floral signal transduction
Post-embryonic development progresses through distinct developmental phase transitions. It has been proposed (Matsoukas, 2014a) that the prolonged juvenile-to-adult and vegetative-to-reproductive phase transitions might be due to several antiflorigenic signals, which affect the transcription levels of florigen FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT; Corbesier et al., 2007), and SQUAMOSA PROMOTER BINDING PROTEIN-LIKE (SPL; Shikata et al., 2009) genes.
Juvenility can be defined as the early period of development during which the abundance of antiflorigenic signals such as miR156/miR157 (Lauter et al., 2005; Martin et al., 2009; Lee et al., 2010; Varkonyi-Gasic et al., 2010) is sufficiently high to suppress the expression of FT and SPLs (Shikata et al., 2009, 2012; Wang et al., 2009; Jung et al., 2011). On the other hand, expression of miR172 in leaves activates FT (Aukerman and Sakai, 2003; Jung et al., 2007), through repression of AP2-like transcripts SCHLAFMÜTZE (SMZ), SCHNARCHZAPFEN (SNZ) and TARGET OF EAT 1–3 (TOE1-3; Jung et al., 2007; Mathieu et al., 2009), whereas the increase in SPLs at the shoot apical meristem (SAM), leads to the activation of floral meristem identity genes (Wang et al., 2009; Yamaguchi et al., 2009), which result in vegetative-to-reproductive phase transition.
Light is a key regulator of the juvenile-to-adult and vegetative-to-reproductive phase transitions (Turck et al., 2008; Matsoukas et al., 2012; Lifschitz et al., 2014; Matsoukas, 2015). It constitutes a critical environmental growth indicator, which is estimated by the duration, quality, direction and intensity, as well as the essential energy source for the synthesis of carbohydrates by the photosynthetic apparatus. Light perception is mediated through the action of photoreceptors, namely PHYTOCHROMES (PHYs; derives from Greek phyto- “relating to plants” and khrōma “color”; Chen and Chory, 2011), CRYPTOCHROMES (CRYs; derives from Greek kruptós “hidden” and khrōma “color”; Chaves et al., 2011), the ultraviolet B photoreceptor ULTRA VIOLET RESISTANCE LOCUS 8 (Jenkins, 2014), phototropins (Christie, 2007) and the ZEITLUPE (ZTL) family members ZTL, FLAVIN-BINDING, KELCH-REPEAT F-BOX (FKF1), and LOV KELCH PROTEIN 2 (LKP2; Kim et al., 2007; Suetsugu and Wada, 2013). Members of each of these photoreceptor families have direct interactions with circadian clock genes and proteins.
Several molecular mechanisms that mediate sugar responses have been identified in plants (reviewed in Rolland et al., 2006; Smeekens et al., 2010; Dobrenel et al., 2013; Lastdrager et al., 2014; Smeekens and Hellmann, 2014; Van den Ende, 2014; Li and Sheen, 2016). Sugar signals can be generated either by carbohydrate concentration and relative ratios to other metabolites, such as hormones and carbon-nitrogen ratio, or by flux through sugar-specific transporters and/or sensors (Matsoukas, 2014b). Glucose, sucrose and trehalose-6-phosphate (T6P) have been recognized as pivotal integrating regulatory molecules that control the expression of genes involved in floral signal transduction (reviewed in Ponnu et al., 2011; Bolouri Moghaddam and Van den Ende, 2013; Matsoukas, 2014b).
Glucose-mediated signal transduction is largely dependent on HEXOKINASE1 (HXK1)-dependent pathway, HXK1-independent pathway, and glycolysis-dependent pathway, which utilizes the SUCROSE NONFERMENTING RELATED KINASE1 (SnRK1)/TARGET OF RAPAMYCIN (TOR) pathway (Moore et al., 2003; Baena-Gonzalez et al., 2007; Ren et al., 2012). SnRK1 has a role when sugars are in extremely limited supply, whereas HXK and Tre6P play a role in the presence of excess sugar. Sucrose plays an essential role in the regulation of important metabolic processes (reviewed in Tognetti et al., 2013). Its concentration tends to be directly related to light intensity (LI), and inversely related to temperature. It has been shown that sucrose, together with T6P act as proxies for the carbohydrate status in plant tissues (Lunn et al., 2006; Wahl et al., 2013; Xing et al., 2015). It is notable that T6P inhibits the activity of the SnRK1 in sugar metabolic control of floral signal transduction (Zhang et al., 2009). In particular, mutations in SNRK1 confer early flowering, whereas SnRK1 overexpression delays flowering (Baena-Gonzalez et al., 2007; Tsai and Gazzarrini, 2012). Several lines of evidence suggest that Tre6P inhibits SnRK1 when sucrose is above a threshold level (Polge and Thomas, 2007; Zhang et al., 2009). When the sucrose concentration decreases, with Tre6P decreasing as well, SnRK1 is released from repression, promoting the expression of genes involved in photosynthesis-related events, so that more carbon is made available (Delatte et al., 2011). Mutations in T6P signaling pathway confer late flowering. This late flowering phenotype was found to be due to reduced expression levels of FT, the elevated levels of miR156, and reduced levels of at least three miR156-regulated transcripts: SPL3, 4, 5 (Wahl et al., 2013). However, T6P not only signals sucrose availability (Lunn et al., 2006), but it also negatively regulates sucrose levels by restricting sucrose synthesis and/or promoting sucrose catabolism (Yadav et al., 2014). Interestingly, the regulatory effects of T6P on growth and development would be an effective means for manipulating carbon partitioning and plant yield (Smeekens, 2015).
The identification of downstream components of photoreceptor signaling that involved in floral signal transduction has revealed a crosstalk between pathways of different light qualities as well as with other seemingly unrelated signaling pathways. One such crosstalk that has not received much attention and involves carbohydrates, forms the focus of this article.
Light perception and circadian clock
The circadian [derived from the Latin roots “circa” (around) and “diem” (day)] system is a complex regulatory network. It is consists of a set of proteins that forms an interconnected feedback network with multiple loops. This system provides temporal information to organisms to coordinate developmental and metabolic responses in coincidence with the environmental conditions. One of the main functions of light in regulation of floral signal transduction is in the initiation of cues that interact with the circadian oscillator and entrain the circadian rhythm. Several reviews have been published on the circadian clock system recently (Romanowski and Yanovsky, 2015; Endo, 2016; Sanchez and Kay, 2016), so the circadian clock will not be described in great detail here. The circadian clock system has three primary components. First is the central oscillator/pacemaker that generates the 24 h oscillators. A model for the Arabidopsis circadian oscillator described a series of multiple interlocked transcriptional–translational feedback loops referred to as the morning, core, and evening loops (Huang et al., 2012; Pokhilko et al., 2012). The “morning complex” comprises the genes encoding the proteins CIRCADIAN CLOCK ASSOCIATED 1 (CCA1; Wang and Tobin, 1998) and LATE ELONGATED HYPOCOTYL (LHY). Both genes increase their expression prior to dawn (Schaffer et al., 1998). The “morning complex” genes encoding PSEUDO-RESPONSE REGULATOR (PRR) 5, 7, and 9 increase their expression after dawn (Matsushika et al., 2000; Farre et al., 2005). The “evening loop” comprises genes encoding GI (Fowler et al., 1999; Park et al., 1999) and TIME OF CAB EXPRESSION 1 (TOC1; Strayer et al., 2000) as well as the evening complex genes encoding EARLY FLOWERING (ELF) 3, 4 (Herrero et al., 2012), and LUX ARRHYTHMO (LUX; Hazen et al., 2005; Nusinow et al., 2011). The “evening complex” genes increase their expression prior to, and after dusk. The “morning” and “evening” complex proteins regulate each other through a series of promoter cis-acting elements (Harmer et al., 2000; Alabadi et al., 2001; Covington et al., 2008), and protein–protein interactions (Kim et al., 2007; Nusinow et al., 2011; Chow and Kay, 2013). These type of interactions create a robust and tunable oscillator that modulate gene expression in a coordinated 24 h rhythm.
The second component is the input pathway that synchronizes or entrains the oscillator with environmental cues. The best-characterized signal is light (reviewed in Kami et al., 2010). In Arabidopsis, red/far-red light perception is mediated by PHYs. Blue light perception is mediated by CRYs and the blue-light sensing proteins ZTL, FKF1, and LKP2. The third component is the output pathway that links the oscillator to processes under circadian rhythm such as photoperiodic induction and floral signal transduction.
The plant circadian oscillator is also entrained by daily temperature rhythms (Wenden et al., 2011) and sugars (Blasing et al., 2005; Dodd et al., 2005; Knight et al., 2008; Dalchau et al., 2011; Haydon et al., 2013). However, the perception and transduction of such signals are not fully understood. Considering that photosynthates can contribute to the fine-tuning of the circadian clock (reviewed in Sanchez and Kay, 2016) and that floral signal transduction in LDs is also controlled by the circadian clock (Matsoukas et al., 2012; Song et al., 2013), it has been hypothesized that photosynthates might have a role in modulating the photoperiodic timing mechanism, which includes the PHYs and CRYs (Dodd et al., 2015).
PRRs have been identified as components of the circadian clock (Nakamichi et al., 2007; Ito et al., 2008). Generally, it has been proposed that PRRs contribute to photoperiod measurement through regulation of the time-keeping mechanism associated with CO transcription (Strayer et al., 2000; Yanovsky and Kay, 2002; Nakamichi et al., 2007, 2010). Recently, it was shown that PRRs form a light-signaling mechanism dedicated to photoperiodic flowering through their accumulation during the day, transferring information on light exposure to CO protein (Hayama et al., 2017), which acts upstream of FT and TSF. Interestingly, PRR7 expression is coordinately modulated not only by light but also by photosynthesis, permitting PRR7 to act as a transcriptional repressor in circadian sugar signaling (Haydon et al., 2013). Therefore, specific circadian-clock components not only transfer temporal information to a photoperiodic time-keeping mechanism but also convey qualitative and quantitative information on light exposure to the time-keeping mechanism, establishing measurement of day length.
Interplay between sugar and phytochrome signaling modulates floral signal transduction
In Arabidopsis, the PHY family consists of PHYA, PHYB, PHYD, and PHYE (Table 1; Clack et al., 1994). PHYA is predominately involved in physiological responses to continuous far-red light, whereas PHYB is involved in responses to red light. The phyA mutant flowers significantly later than wild type (WT) in long days (LDs), which indicates that PHYA acts to promote flowering (Johnson et al., 1994). In antithesis, the early flowering phenotype of phyB mutant under short day (SD) and LD conditions demonstrates the repressive role of PHYB in floral signal transduction (Guo et al., 1998). Interestingly, the identification of downstream components of photoreceptor-signaling that involved in floral induction has revealed a crosstalk between pathways of different light qualities as well as with other seemingly unrelated pathways such as phytohormones (Matsoukas, 2014b) and carbohydrate metabolism-related events (Dijkwel et al., 1997; Short, 1999; Kozuka et al., 2005; Ghassemian et al., 2006).
Table 1
| Gene name | Abbreviation | Allelic | Gene identifier | Description | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ABA INSENSITIVE4 | ABI4 | ATABI4; GIN6; ISI3; SALOBRENO 5; SAN5; SIS5; SUN6; T7M7.16 | AT2G40220 | ABI4 involved in ABA signal transduction, ABA-mediated glucose response, and HXK-dependent sugar responses. | Finkelstein et al., 1998; Arenas-Huertero et al., 2000 |
| CHLOROPHYLL A/B-BINDING PROTEIN | CAB | AB165; F1N18.4; F1N18_4; LHCB1.1 | AT1G29920 | Encodes lhcb1.1, a component of the LHCIIb light harvesting complex associated with photosystem II. | Friso et al., 2004; Cottage and Gray, 2011 |
| CHLOROPLASTIC β-AMYLASE3 | BAM3 | AtBAM3; BAM3; BETA-AMYLASE 3; BMY8; DL4575C; FCAALL.5 | AT4G17090 | BAM3 encodes a β-amylase targeted to the chloroplast. | Lao et al., 1999; Mccallum et al., 2000; Kaplan and Guy, 2005 |
| CRYPTOCHROME-INTERACTING BASIC-HELIX-LOOP-HELIX 1 | CIB1 | T4L20.110; T4L20_110 | AT4G34530 | CIB1 acts together with additional CIB1-related proteins to promote CRY2-dependent floral signal transduction. CIB1 promotes florigen expression. | Liu et al., 2008 |
| CONSTANS | CO | B-BOX DOMAIN PROTEIN 1; BBX1; F14F8.220; F14F8_220; FG | AT5G15840 | CO promotes floral signal transduction in response to LDs, is modulated by the circadian clock and day length. | Wenkel et al., 2006 |
| CRYPTOCHROME1 | CRY1 | ATCRY1; BLU1; HY4; OOP2; OUT OF PHASE 2; T3H13.14; T3H13_14 | AT4G08920 | CRY1 functions in perception of blue / green ratio of light. | Valverde et al., 2004 |
| CRYPTOCHROME2 | CRY2 | AT-PHH1; ATCRY2; F19P19.14; F19P19_14; FHA; PHH1 | AT1G04400 | Blue light receptor. It is a positive regulator of floral signal transduction via CO. | Ahmad et al., 1995 |
| FLAVIN-BINDING, KELCH REPEAT, F BOX 1 | FKF1 | ADO3; F BOX 1; T23K23.10 | AT1G68050 | FKF1 forms a complex with GI on the CO promoter to regulate the expression of CO. | Nelson et al., 2000 |
| FLOWERING LOCUS T | FT | F5I14.3; F5I14_3; REDUCED STEM BRANCHING 8; RSB8 | AT1G65480 | FT protein is the long-sought florigen, or at least, part of it. | Kardailsky et al., 1999; Kobayashi et al., 1999; Corbesier et al., 2007 |
| GIGANTEA | GI | FB; T22J18.6; T22J18_6 | AT1G22770 | GI promotes floral signal transduction under LDs, in a circadian clock-controlled floral induction pathway. Starch excess mutant. | Eimert et al., 1995; Tseng et al., 2004; Penfield and Hall, 2009 |
| ELONGATED HYPOCOTYL 5 | HY5 | F2I11.150; F2I11_150; TED 5 | AT5G11260 | HY5 is a central mediator of CRY and PHY responses. | Lee et al., 2007 |
| LOV KELCH PROTEIN 2 | LKP2 | ADAGIO 2; ADO2 | AT2G18915 | Overexpression of LKP2 results in arrhythmic phenotypes, and a loss of photoperiodic control of floral signal transduction. | Schultz et al., 2001 |
| microRNA156a | miR156a | Ath-MIR156a; gene family: MIPF0000008; Accession: MI0000178 | Next upstream gene: At2g25090; next downstream gene: At2g25100 | Arabidopsis miR156 is an ambient temperature-responsive miRNA. It plays an important role in regulating floral signal transduction. | Telfer et al., 1997; Telfer and Poethig, 1998; Aukerman and Sakai, 2003; Wu and Poethig, 2006 |
| microRNA157b | miR157b | Ath-MIR157b; gene family: MIPF0000008; Accession: MI0000185 | Next upstream gene: At1g66790; next downstream gene: At1g66800 | Overexpression of Arabidopsis miR157b induces bushy architecture and delayed juvenile-to-adult phase transition | Shikata et al., 2012; May et al., 2013 |
| microRNA172a | miR172a | Ath-MIR172a; gene family: MIPF0000035; Accession: MI0000215 | Next upstream gene: At2g28050; next downstream gene: At2g28060 | miR172 mediates light signals from GI and promotes floral signal transduction in Arabidopsis by inducing FT. | Jung et al., 2007; Wu et al., 2009 |
| PHYTOCHROME A | PHYA | ELONGATED HYPOCOTYL 8; F14J9.23; F14J9_23; FHY2; FRE1; HY8 | AT1G09570 | Light-labile cytoplasmic red/far-red light photoreceptor involved in floral signal transduction. | Whitelam et al., 1993; Reed et al., 1994 |
| PHYTOCHROME B | PHYB | HY3; MSF3.17; MSF3_17; OOP1; OUT OF PHASE 1 | AT2G18790 | PHYB regulates the expression of genes in response to red light. It repress floral signal trusnduction. | Koornneef et al., 1980; Reed et al., 1994 |
| PHYTOCHROME D | PHYD | DL4165C; FCAALL.323 | AT4G16250 | Encodes a phytochrome photoreceptor with a function similar to that of PHYB. | Reed et al., 1994 |
| PHYTOCHROME E | PHYE | F15J5.100; F15J5_100 | AT4G18130 | PHYE is member of Histidine Kinase. Mutation in PHYE confers early flowering. | Reed et al., 1994; Devlin et al., 1998 |
| PLASTOCYANIN | PETE 1 | T23E18.3; T23E18_3 | AT1G76100 | One of two Arabidopsis plastocyanin genes. PETE1 is essential for electron transport. | Abdel-Ghany, 2009; Pesaresi et al., 2009 |
| PLASTOCYANIN | PETE 2 | DRT112; F14O10.6; F14O10_6; | AT1G20340 | One of two Arabidopsis plastocyanin genes. It is expressed 10x higher than PETE1. | Abdel-Ghany, 2009; Pesaresi et al., 2009 |
| RIBULOSE 1,5-BISPHOSPHATE CARBOXYLASE/OXYGENASE | RBCS | OSRBCS; RBCS-C; OsJ_016909 | LOC4351966 | Encodes a member of the Rubisco small subunit multigene family in Oryza sativa. | Takano et al., 2009 |
| SCHLAFMÜTZE | SMZ | T15C9.6 | AT3G54990 | Encodes an AP2 domain transcription factor that can repress floral signal transduction. | Mathieu et al., 2009 |
| SCHNARCHZAPFEN | SNZ | T16B24.11; T16B24_11 | AT2G39250 | Encodes an AP2 domain transcription factor that can repress floral signal transduction. | Mathieu et al., 2009 |
| SQUAMOSA PROMOTER BINDING PROTEIN-LIKE 3 | SPL3 | T1B8.11; T1B8_11 | AT2G33810 | SPL3 is involved in regulation of floral signal transduction. Its temporal expression is regulated by miR156. | Jung et al., 2011; Wahl et al., 2013 |
| SQUAMOSA PROMOTER BINDING PROTEIN-LIKE 4 | SPL4 | F8L10.12; F8L10_12; FTM6; | AT1G53160 | SPL4 is involved in regulation of floral signal transduction. Its temporal expression is regulated by miR156. | Jung et al., 2011; Wahl et al., 2013 |
| SQUAMOSA PROMOTER BINDING PROTEIN-LIKE 5 | SPL5 | n/a | AT3G15270 | SPL5 is involved in regulation of floral signal transduction. Its temporal expression is regulated by miR156. | Jung et al., 2011; Wahl et al., 2013 |
| SQUAMOSA PROMOTER BINDING PROTEIN-LIKE 13A | SPL13A | MBA10.13; MBA10_13; SPL13 | AT5G50570 | SPL genes function in distinct pathways to promote different adult vegetative phase traits and floral induction. SPL13A and SPL13B encode the same protein. | Cardon et al., 1999; Xing et al., 2010 |
| SQUAMOSA PROMOTER BINDING PROTEIN-LIKE 13B | SPL13B | MFB16.6; SPL13 | AT5G50670 | SPL13B and SPL13A encode the same protein. | Cardon et al., 1999; Xing et al., 2010 |
| SQUAMOSAPROMOTER BINDING PROTEIN-LIKE 15 | SPL15 | n/a | AT3G57920 | Encodes a transcriptional regulator that is involved in the vegetative-to-reproductive phase transition. Its expression is regulated by miR156b. | Cardon et al., 1999; Schwarz et al., 2008 |
| SQUAMOSAPROMOTER BINDING PROTEIN-LIKE 9 | SPL 9 | AtSPL9; T24P15.11; T24P15_11 | AT2G42200 | Encodes a putative transcriptional regulator that is involved in the vegetative to reproductive phase transition. Expression is regulated by miR156b. | Cardon et al., 1999; Schwarz et al., 2008; Wang et al., 2008; Xing et al., 2010 |
| SUCROSE-PHOSPHATE SYNTHASE | SPS | ATSPS1F, SPS1F, SPSA1, SUCROSE-PHOSPHATE SYNTHASE A1 | AT5G20280 | Encodes a protein with putative sucrose-phosphate synthase activity. | Park et al., 2008 |
| SUCROSE TRANSPORTER 4 | SUT4 | ATSUC4; ATSUT4; F21M12.35; F21M12_35; SUC4 | AT1G09960 | AtSUT4 is expressed in companion cells contributing, along with AtSUC2, to phloem loading. | Schulze et al., 2003 |
| SUCROSE UNCOUPLED 6 | SUN6 | ATABI4; GIN6; ISI3; SAN5; SIS5; T7M7.16 | AT2G40220 | Involved in ABA signal transduction, ABA-mediated glucose response, and HXK-dependent sugar responses. | Arenas-Huertero et al., 2000 |
| SWEET11 | SWEET11 | NODULIN MTN3 FAMILY PROTEIN; AtSWEET11; T21J18.1 | AT3G48740 | Encodes a member of the SWEET sucrose efflux transporter family proteins. | Chen et al., 2012 |
| SWEET12 | SWEET12 | BIDIRECTIONAL SUGAR TRANSPORTER SWEET12-LIKE PROTEIN | AT5G23660 | Encodes a member of the SWEET sucrose efflux transporter family proteins. | Chen et al., 2012 |
| TARGET OF EARLY ACTIVATION TAGGED EAT 1 | TOE1 | RAP2.7; T17D12.11; T17D12_11 | AT2G28550 | TOE1 is member of the AP2 family. AP2 regulates floral signal transduction through regulating SOC1 and FT expression. | Aukerman and Sakai, 2003; Jung et al., 2007; Mathieu et al., 2009; Yant et al., 2010; Zhang et al., 2015 |
| TARGET OF EARLY ACTIVATION TAGGED EAT 2 | TOE2 | MGO3.10; MGO3_10 | AT5G60120 | TOE2 is member of the AP2 family. Overexpression of TOEs confer late flowering. | Aukerman and Sakai, 2003; Jung et al., 2007; Mathieu et al., 2009; Yant et al., 2010; Zhang et al., 2015 |
| TARGET OF EARLY ACTIVATION TAGGED EAT 3 | TOE3 | K21H1.22; K21H1_22 | AT5G67180 | TOE3 is member of the AP2 family. | Aukerman and Sakai, 2003; Jung et al., 2007; Mathieu et al., 2009; Yant et al., 2010; Zhang et al., 2015 |
| TREHALOSE-6-PHOSPHATE SYNTHASE | TPS1 | ATTPS1; T30F21.9; T30F21_9 | AT1G78580 | TPS1 synthesizes T6P. Knockdown of TPS1 reduces T6P cellular concentrations and represses floral signal transduction. | Van Dijken et al., 2004; Wahl et al., 2013 |
| TWIN SISTER OF FT | TSF | F9F13.20; F9F13_20 | AT4G20370 | TSF Encodes a floral inducer that is a homolog of FT. Mutant lines overexpressing TSF flower earlier than WT. | Yamaguchi et al., 2005 |
| ULTRA VIOLET RESISTANCE LOCUS 8 | UVR8 | MGI19.7; MGI19_7 | AT5G63860 | UV-B-specific signaling component that orchestrates expression of a range of genes with vital UV-protective functions. | Rizzini et al., 2011 |
| ZEITLUPE | ZTL | ADO1; FKF1-LIKE PROTEIN 2; FKL2; LKP1; MSF19.2; MSF19_2 | AT5G57360 | The protein contains a PAS domain ZTL that contributes to the plant fitness carbon fixation, biomass by regulating the circadian clock. | Somers et al., 2000 |
List of genes that are discussed in this mini review.
Carbohydrates modulate development through PHY-mediated responses (Tsukaya et al., 1991; Barnes et al., 1996; Dijkwel et al., 1997; Short, 1999). PHYA is involved in activation of several photosynthetic genes, such as RIBULOSE 1,5-BISPHOSPHATE CARBOXYLASE/OXYGENASE (RBCS), CHLOROPHYLL A/B-BINDING PROTEIN (CAB), and PLASTOCYANIN (PC). CAB, RBCS, and PC are repressed by sucrose or glucose (Dijkwel et al., 1997; Takano et al., 2009; Cottage and Gray, 2011). Exogenous sucrose application or high light intensity (LI) reverses the late-flowering phenotype of the Arabidopsis phyA mutant. It has been proposed that the late-flowering phenotype of phyA might be due to a reduced photosynthetic input to FT (King et al., 2008). This is supported by the fact that high LI reverses its late flowering phenotype, the mutant has half the WT leaf area and, in addition, a reduced photosynthetic pigment content (Walters et al., 1999; Bagnall and King, 2001; King et al., 2008).
Overexpression of PHYs in Nicotiana tabacum (Sharkey et al., 1991) and Solanum tuberosum (Sharkey et al., 1991; Yanovsky et al., 1998) increase the transcription of SUCROSE-PHOSPHATE SYNTHASE (SPS). Interestingly, ectopic expression of SPS has been shown to promote flowering in several plant species (Micallef et al., 1995; Baxter et al., 2003). On the other hand, loss of PHYs in Oryza sativa phyA phyB phyC triple mutant affect sugar metabolism, carbon partitioning and sugar transport (Jumtee et al., 2009). In Arabidopsis, the circadian regulated sugar-induced β-AMYLASE3 (BAM3) gene is induced by PHYA transcription (reviewed in Kaplan et al., 2006). BAM3 is essential for maltose production (Niittyla et al., 2004), whereas it regulates the juvenile-to-adult and vegetative-to-reproductive phase transitions via starch catabolism-related events (Matsoukas et al., 2013).
The SUCROSE UNCOUPLED6 (SUN6) gene of Arabidopsis is involved in hexose kinase-mediated sugar sensing (Huijser et al., 2000). Gene expression analysis in the sugar insensitive sun6 mutant has shown that PHYA signaling is not repressed by sugars (Dijkwel et al., 1997). SUN6 was shown to be allelic to ABA INSENSITIVE 4 (ABI4). Functional analysis of the abi4 mutant has shown that it is defective in ABA metabolism or response (Dijkwel et al., 1997; Huijser et al., 2000). Therefore, the early flowering phenotype of sun6, at least in LDs, demonstrates a tight interplay between light quality, sugar and phytohormone pathways in regulation of floral induction in Arabidopsis.
Further evidence on interaction between carbohydrate-metabolism repression and light signaling is provided by the inhibitory activity of PHYB in the control of hypocotyl elongation by PHYA, in presence of exogenous sucrose or glucose (Short, 1999). Down-regulation or over-expression of SUT4 in Solanum tuberosum delays or promotes floral induction, respectively (Chincinska et al., 2008). Besides floral induction, in the same work evidence was provided on SUT4 involvement in the shade avoidance response. This suggest that PHY-dependent and photoperiod-dependent developmental responses, such as floral signal transduction and shade avoidance share a common downstream mechanism in which sucrose accumulation levels are actively involved.
Interplay between sugar and cryptochrome signaling modulates floral induction
CRYPTOCHROMES (CRYs) comprise flavoproteins that are able to detect blue light (Guo et al., 1998). The role of CRY1 in promoting floral induction in Arabidopsis has been demonstrated by the late flowering phenotype of cry1 mutants compared to WT in various light conditions (Mozley and Thomas, 1995). Similarly, the cry2/fha1 (fha-1 is a mutant allele of CRY2 in Landsberg erecta background) mutant flowers later than the WT in LDs but not in SDs, whereas transgenic plants overexpressing CRY2 flowered slightly early in SDs but not in LDs (Koornneef et al., 1991). It has been shown that CRY2 interacts with bHLH proteins CRYPTOCHROME-INTERACTING BASIC-HELIX-LOOP-HELIX (CIB) proteins to regulate the FT expression and floral signal transduction (Liu et al., 2008; Liu H. et al., 2013; Liu Y. et al., 2013).
Further evidence for the interaction between photosynthetic assimilates and CRYs is provided by a microarray analysis revealing regulation of CRY1 and CRY2 transcription levels by glucose (Li et al., 2006). It has been reported that PHYA interacts with CRY1, and PHYB binds CRY2 (Ahmad et al., 1998; Mas et al., 2000), so red and blue light may crosstalk at multiple layers to co-ordinately regulate developmental transitions. PHYB, CONSTANS (CO) and, indirectly, PHYA are under the regulation of CRYs (Valverde et al., 2004; Thomas, 2006). Therefore, any modification on CRYs transcription levels would also affect the other photoreceptors and CO, which act directly upstream of FT and TWIN SISTER OF FT (TSF) with catalytic effects on the juvenile-to-adult and vegetative-to-reproductive phase transitions.
Mutants lacking CRYs or having defects in their signaling pathway show changes in chloroplast composition and disturbance of normal acclimation (Smith et al., 1993; Walters et al., 1999). The fact that CRY1 and CRY2 can also act as sensors of irradiance (Guo et al., 1998) could provide a further link between light quality and carbohydrate metabolism in regulation of floral signal transduction.
The Arabidopsis ELONGATED HYPOCOTYL 5 protein (HY5) is a central mediator of CRY and PHY responses (Lee et al., 2007). It integrates multiple environmental and phytohormonal signaling inputs (Catala et al., 2011; Xu et al., 2014) by mediating homeostatic coordination of sugars (Chen et al., 2016), and maintaining chlorophyll levels and CO2 uptake. It appears that HY5 might operate in conjunction with the circadian oscillator to adjust levels of rhythmic photosynthetic gene expression (Toledo-Ortiz et al., 2014). Interestingly, HY5 regulates both sucrose metabolism and subsequent movement of sucrose into phloem cells for shoot-root translocation by promoting the expression levels of SWEET11 and SWEET12 (Chen et al., 2016), genes encoding sucrose efflux transporters (Chen et al., 2012), and TPS1 (Chen et al., 2016), a gene encoding T6P. The T6P pathway controls the expression of SPLs, partially via miR156, and partly independently of the miR156-dependent pathway via the florigen FT (Wahl et al., 2013). Evidence have been provided that miR156, and possibly miR172, are directly regulated by HY5 (Zhang et al., 2011). Taken together, these data could provide a potential mechanistic link, at the molecular level, on how the photoreceptor-sugar crosstalk might be involved in regulation of floral signal transduction via the HY5 and TPS1-miR156-SPL module.
Light intensity and floral signal transduction
LI seems to be particularly important during the juvenile-to-adult and vegetative-to-reproductive phase transition (Figure 1). It has been proposed that the inability to flower during the juvenile period is because of a foliar inability to produce floral signals, the presence of antiflorigens, and/or of the incompetence of the SAM to respond (Zeevaart, 1985; Matsoukas et al., 2012, 2013; Matsoukas, 2015). The length of the juvenile vegetative phase in daylenth-sensitive plants can be revealed by reciprocal transfers between inductive and non-inductive photoperiods (Adams et al., 2003; Matsoukas et al., 2013; Matsoukas, 2014a).
Figure 1
Exposure to low or high LI levels can delay or hasten time to flowering, respectively. For instance, Achillea millefolium grown under a 16 h d−1 photoperiod in controlled environment conditions flowered after 57, 45, and 37 d when grown under 100, 200, or 300 μmol m−2 s−1, respectively (Zhang et al., 1996). Similarly, Adams et al. (1999) demonstrated that Petunia flowering was hastened by LDs, but that decreased LI prolonged time to flowering. Arabidopsis plants flower rapidly under non-inductive SDs after exposure to 8–12 d at a high LI. It has been shown that this “photosynthetic” response is FT-independent. In contrast, the IDD8 locus of Arabidopsis was reported to have a role in FT-dependent induction of flowering by modulating sugar transport and metabolism by regulating SUCROSE SYNTHASE4 activity (Seo et al., 2011).
However, the effect of LI on time to flowering can be unpredictable in several species. Hence, the term “facultative irradiance response” (FI) has been coined to describe a developmental hastening of flowering by addition of supplemental light (Erwin and Warner, 2000). Species such as Antirrhinum [LD plant (LDP)], Nicotiana [LDP or SD plant (SDP)], and Petunia (LDP) that exhibit a FI response, show a decrease in leaf numbers and days to flower as irradiance increases. In contrast, the term “irradiance indifferent” (II) refers to species such as Salvia (SDP or facultative LDP) and Zinnia (day neutral plant or facultative SDP) that do not show any response to increased irradiance (Thomas and Vince-Prue, 1997; Erwin and Warner, 2000; Mattson and Erwin, 2005; Thomas, 2006).
Despite the high sensitivity of FI species to elevated levels of LI, the majority does not show a hastened flowering phenotype with increasing irradiance. It has been shown for Pelargonium x hortorum that a linear relationship between LI and days to flower, for an increased irradiance developmental response, exists until a threshold level between 6.89 and 9.01 μmol m−2 d−1 (Erickson et al., 1980). However, some species require greater threshold levels. For instance, absolute flowering of Digitalis was reached with LI > 11 μmol m d (Fausey et al., 2001). Furthermore, giving supplemental irradiance (at 30, 60, and 90 μmol m−2 s−1) to Gerbera hastened flowering by up to 23 d in the winter, but only up to 11 d during the Spring (Gagnon and Dansereau, 1989). This suggests that the impact of supplemental irradiance on floral signal transduction can be dependent on season's ambient light conditions and species' threshold requirement.
What is not clear is the precise molecular genetic mechanisms by which LI, if acting through photosynthates can regulate the floral signal transduction. It may well be that assimilates themselves act as part of the florigen (Périlleux and Bernier, 2002; Bernier and Perilleux, 2005). Interestingly, long-distance floral signal transport is now accepted as more complex than the movement of a single type of signal molecule (Matsoukas et al., 2012; Matsoukas, 2015). It is possible that total carbohydrate, or a particular carbohydrate level may be required to reach a specific threshold in order to sustain a steady supply of sufficient bulk flow through the phloem from the leaves to the SAM to enable delivery of florigen. This would be necessary to render the SAM competent to flower.
Concluding remarks
Floral signal transduction has been the focus of a great deal of attention during the last few decades. The molecular mechanisms underlying light perception and the downstream signaling pathways that regulate the floral signal transduction have been intensively challenged. The fact that some photoreceptors can also act as sensors of irradiance provides a promising link between light qualities and assimilate partitioning and resource utilization in regulation of floral signal transduction.
Numerous reports highlight the role of several molecules that integrate light, clock, temperature, and hormone signaling pathways in orchestration of floral signal transduction. However, further investigation is vital for the elucidation of the molecular mechanism underlying photoreceptor-mediated signal integration at the subcellular, tissue-specific and temporal level in response to sugar signaling. This research field is prosperous and technical advances in “-OMICS” tools might shed light on the underlying molecular genetic mechanisms.
Statements
Author contributions
The author confirms being the sole contributor of this work and approved it for publication.
Funding
Research in the laboratory of IM is supported by a Jenkinson TIRI Award and the University of Bolton, UK.
Acknowledgments
The author would like to thank Professor Brian Thomas (University of Warwick, UK) and Dr. Andrea Massiah (University of Warwick, UK) for valuable discussions, and the three independent reviewers for their insightful comments on the article.
Conflict of interest
The author declares that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Nomenclature
The following nomenclature will be used in this article:
• Names of genes are written in italicized upper-case letters, e.g., CRY2.
• Names of proteins are written in non-italicized upper-case letters, e.g., CRY2.
• Names of mutants are written in italicized lower-case letters, e.g., cry2.
References
1
Abdel-GhanyS. E. (2009). Contribution of plastocyanin isoforms to photosynthesis and copper homeostasis in Arabidopsis thaliana grown at different copper regimes. Planta229, 767–779. 10.1007/s00425-008-0869-z
2
AdamsS. R.MunirM.ValdesV. M.LangtonF. A.JacksonS. D. (2003). Using flowering times and leaf numbers to model the phases of photoperiod sensitivity in Antirrhinum majus L. Ann. Bot.92, 689–696. 10.1093/aob/mcg194
3
AdamsS. R.PearsonS.HadleyP.PatefieldW. (1999). The effects of temperature and light integral on the phases of photoperiod sensitivity in Petunia x hybrida. Ann. Bot.83, 263–269. 10.1006/anbo.1998.0817
4
AhmadM.JarilloJ. A.SmirnovaO.CashmoreA. R. (1998). The CRY1 blue light photoreceptor of Arabidopsis interacts with phytochrome A in vitro. Mol. Cell1, 939–948. 10.1016/S1097-2765(00)80094-5
5
AhmadM.LinC.CashmoreA. (1995). Mutations throughout an Arabidopsis blue-light photoreceptor impair blue-light-responsive anthocyanin accumulation and inhibition of hypocotyl elongation. Plant J.8, 653–658. 10.1046/j.1365-313X.1995.08050653.x
6
AlabadiD.OyamaT.YanovskyM. J.HarmonF. G.MasP.KayS. A. (2001). Reciprocal regulation between TOC1 and LHY/CCA1 within the Arabidopsis circadian clock. Science293, 880–883. 10.1126/science.1061320
7
Arenas-HuerteroF.ArroyoA.ZhouL.SheenJ.LeonP. (2000). Analysis of Arabidopsis glucose insensitive mutants, gin5 and gin6, reveals a central role of the plant hormone ABA in the regulation of plant vegetative development by sugar. Genes Dev.14, 2085–2096. 10.1101/gad.14.16.2085
8
AukermanM. J.SakaiH. (2003). Regulation of flowering time and floral organ identity by a MicroRNA and its APETALA2-like target genes. Plant Cell15, 2730–2741. 10.1105/tpc.016238
9
Baena-GonzalezE.RollandF.TheveleinJ. M.SheenJ. (2007). A central integrator of transcription networks in plant stress and energy signalling. Nature448, 938–942. 10.1038/nature06069
10
BagnallD. J.KingR. W. (2001). Phytochrome, photosynthesis and flowering of Arabidopsis thaliana: photophysiological studies using mutants and transgenic lines. Funct. Plant Biol.28, 401–408. 10.1071/PP99123
11
BarnesS. A.NishizawaN. K.QuaggioR. B.WhitelamG. C.ChuaN. H. (1996). Far-red light blocks greening of Arabidopsis seedlings via a phytochrome A-mediated change in plastid development. Plant Cell8, 601–615. 10.1105/tpc.8.4.601
12
BaxterC. J.FoyerC. H.TurnerJ.RolfeS. A.QuickW. P. (2003). Elevated sucrose-phosphate synthase activity in transgenic tobacco sustains photosynthesis in older leaves and alters development. J. Exp. Bot.54, 1813–1820. 10.1093/jxb/erg196
13
BernierG.PerilleuxC. (2005). A physiological overview of the genetics of flowering time control. Plant Biotechnol. J.3, 3–16. 10.1111/j.1467-7652.2004.00114.x
14
BlasingO. E.GibonY.GuntherM.HohneM.MorcuendeR.OsunaD.et al. (2005). Sugars and circadian regulation make major contributions to the global regulation of diurnal gene expression in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell17, 3257–3281. 10.1105/tpc.105.035261
15
Bolouri MoghaddamM. R.Van den EndeW. (2013). Sugars, the clock and transition to flowering. Front. Plant Sci.4:22. 10.3389/fpls.2013.00022
16
CardonG.HohmannS.KleinJ.NettesheimK.SaedlerH.HuijserP. (1999). Molecular characterisation of the Arabidopsis SBP-box genes. Gene237, 91–104. 10.1016/S0378-1119(99)00308-X
17
CatalaR.MedinaJ.SalinasJ. (2011). Integration of low temperature and light signaling during cold acclimation response in Arabidopsis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.108, 16475–16480. 10.1073/pnas.1107161108
18
ChavesI.PokornyR.ByrdinM.HoangN.RitzT.BrettelK.et al. (2011). The cryptochromes: blue light photoreceptors in plants and animals. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol.62, 335–364. 10.1146/annurev-arplant-042110-103759
19
ChenL. Q.QuX. Q.HouB. H.SossoD.OsorioS.FernieA. R.et al. (2012). Sucrose efflux mediated by SWEET proteins as a key step for phloem transport. Science335, 207–211. 10.1126/science.1213351
20
ChenM.ChoryJ. (2011). Phytochrome signaling mechanisms and the control of plant development. Trends Cell Biol.21, 664–671. 10.1016/j.tcb.2011.07.002
21
ChenX.YaoQ.GaoX.JiangC.HarberdN. P.FuX. (2016). Shoot-to-root mobile transcription factor HY5 coordinates plant carbon and nitrogen acquisition. Curr. Biol.26, 640–646. 10.1016/j.cub.2015.12.066
22
ChincinskaI.LiescheJ.KrugelU.MichalskaJ.GeigenbergerP.GrimmB.et al. (2008). Sucrose transporter StSUT4 from potato affects flowering, tuberization, and shade avoidance response. Plant Physiol.146, 515–528. 10.1104/pp.107.112334
23
ChowB. Y.KayS. A. (2013). Global approaches for telling time: omics and the Arabidopsis circadian clock. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol.24, 383–392. 10.1016/j.semcdb.2013.02.005
24
ChristieJ. M. (2007). Phototropin blue-light receptors. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol.58, 21–45. 10.1146/annurev.arplant.58.032806.103951
25
ClackT.MathewsS.SharrockR. A. (1994). The phytochrome apoprotein family in Arabidopsis is encoded by 5 genes: the sequences and expression of PHYD and PHYE. Plant Mol. Biol.25, 413–427. 10.1007/BF00043870
26
CorbesierL.VincentC.JangS. H.FornaraF.FanQ. Z.SearleI.et al. (2007). FT protein movement contributes to long-distance signaling in floral induction of Arabidopsis. Science316, 1030–1033. 10.1126/science.1141752
27
CottageA.GrayJ. C. (2011). Timing the switch to phototrophic growth: a possible role of GUN1. Plant Signal. Behav.6, 578–582. 10.4161/psb.6.4.14900
28
CovingtonM. F.MaloofJ. N.StraumeM.KayS. A.HarmerS. L. (2008). Global transcriptome analysis reveals circadian regulation of key pathways in plant growth and development. Genome Biol.9:R130. 10.1186/gb-2008-9-8-r130
29
DalchauN.BaekS. J.BriggsH. M.RobertsonF. C.DoddA. N.GardnerM. J.et al. (2011). The circadian oscillator gene GIGANTEA mediates a long-term response of the Arabidopsis thaliana circadian clock to sucrose. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.108, 5104–5109. 10.1073/pnas.1015452108
30
DelatteT. L.SedijaniP.KondouY.MatsuiM.De JongG. J.SomsenG. W.et al. (2011). Growth arrest by trehalose-6-phosphate: an astonishing case of primary metabolite control over growth by way of the SnRK1 signaling pathway. Plant Physiol. 157, 160–174. 10.1104/pp.111.180422
31
DevlinP. F.PatelS. R.WhitelamG. C. (1998). Phytochrome E influences internode elongation and flowering time in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell10, 1479–1487. 10.1105/tpc.10.9.1479
32
DijkwelP. P.HuijserC.WeisbeekP. J.ChuaN. H.SmeekensS. C. (1997). Sucrose control of phytochrome A signaling in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell9, 583–595. 10.1105/tpc.9.4.583
33
DobrenelT.MarchiveC.AzzopardiM.ClementG.MoreauM.SormaniR.et al. (2013). Sugar metabolism and the plant target of rapamycin kinase: a sweet operaTOR?Front. Plant Sci.4:93. 10.3389/fpls.2013.00093
34
DoddA. N.BelbinE.FrankA.WebbA. A. (2015). Interactions between circadian clocks and photosynthesis for the temporal and spatial coordination of metabolism. Front. Plant Sci. 6:245. 10.3389/fpls.2015.00245
35
DoddA. N.SalathiaN.HallA.KeveiE.TothR.NagyF.et al. (2005). Plant circadian clocks increase photosynthesis, growth, survival, and competitive advantage. Science309, 630–633. 10.1126/science.1115581
36
EimertK.WangS. M.LueW. I.ChenJ. (1995). Monogenic recessive mutations causing both late floral initiation and excess starch accumulation in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell7, 1703–1712. 10.1105/tpc.7.10.1703
37
EndoM. (2016). Tissue-specific circadian clocks in plants. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol.29, 44–49. 10.1016/j.pbi.2015.11.003
38
EricksonV.ArmitageA.CarlsonW.MirandaR. (1980). The effect of cumulative photosynthetically active radiation on the growth and flowering of the seedling geranium, Pelargonium x hortorum. HortScience15, 815–817.
39
ErwinJ.WarnerR. (2000). Determination of photoperiodic response group and effect of supplemental irradiance on flowering of several bedding plant species. Acta Hortic.580, 95–99. 10.17660/ActaHortic.2002.580.11
40
FarreE. M.HarmerS. L.HarmonF. G.YanovskyM. J.KayS. A. (2005). Overlapping and distinct roles of PRR7 and PRR9 in the Arabidopsis circadian clock. Curr. Biol.15, 47–54. 10.1016/j.cub.2004.12.067
41
FauseyB.CameronA.HeinsR. (2001). Daily light integral, photoperiod, and vernalization affect flowering of Digitalis purpurea L.‘Foxy’. HortScience36:565.
42
FinkelsteinR. R.WangM. L.LynchT. J.RaoS.GoodmanH. M. (1998). The Arabidopsis abscisic acid response locus ABI4 encodes an APETALA 2 domain protein. Plant Cell10, 1043–1054. 10.1105/tpc.10.6.1043
43
FowlerS.LeeK.OnouchiH.SamachA.RichardsonK.MorrisB.et al. (1999). GIGANTEA: a circadian clock-controlled gene that regulates photoperiodic flowering in Arabidopsis and encodes a protein with several possible membrane-spanning domains. EMBO J.18, 4679–4688. 10.1093/emboj/18.17.4679
44
FrisoG.GiacomelliL.YtterbergA. J.PeltierJ. B.RudellaA.SunQ.et al. (2004). In-depth analysis of the thylakoid membrane proteome of Arabidopsis thaliana chloroplasts: new proteins, new functions, and a plastid proteome database. Plant Cell16, 478–499. 10.1105/tpc.017814
45
GagnonS.DansereauB. (1989). Influence of light and photoperiod on growth and development of gerbera. Acta Hortic.272, 145–152.
46
GhassemianM.LutesJ.TeppermanJ. M.ChangH. S.ZhuT.WangX.et al. (2006). Integrative analysis of transcript and metabolite profiling data sets to evaluate the regulation of biochemical pathways during photomorphogenesis. Arch. Biochem. Biophys.448, 45–59. 10.1016/j.abb.2005.11.020
47
GuoH.YangH.MocklerT. C.LinC. (1998). Regulation of flowering time by Arabidopsis photoreceptors. Science279, 1360–1363. 10.1126/science.279.5355.1360
48
HarmerS. L.HogeneschJ. B.StraumeM.ChangH. S.HanB.ZhuT.et al. (2000). Orchestrated transcription of key pathways in Arabidopsis by the circadian clock. Science290, 2110–2113. 10.1126/science.290.5499.2110
49
HayamaR.Sarid-KrebsL.RichterR.FernandezV.JangS.CouplandG. (2017). PSEUDO RESPONSE REGULATORs stabilize CONSTANS protein to promote flowering in response to day length. EMBO J.36, 904–918. 10.15252/embj.201693907
50
HaydonM. J.MielczarekO.RobertsonF. C.HubbardK. E.WebbA. A. (2013). Photosynthetic entrainment of the Arabidopsis thaliana circadian clock. Nature502, 689–692. 10.1038/nature12603
51
HazenS. P.SchultzT. F.Pruneda-PazJ. L.BorevitzJ. O.EckerJ. R.KayS. A. (2005). LUX ARRHYTHMO encodes a Myb domain protein essential for circadian rhythms. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.102, 10387–10392. 10.1073/pnas.0503029102
52
HerreroE.KolmosE.BujdosoN.YuanY.WangM.BernsM. C.et al. (2012). EARLY FLOWERING4 recruitment of EARLY FLOWERING3 in the nucleus sustains the Arabidopsis circadian clock. Plant Cell24, 428–443. 10.1105/tpc.111.093807
53
HuangW.Perez-GarciaP.PokhilkoA.MillarA. J.AntoshechkinI.RiechmannJ. L.et al. (2012). Mapping the core of the Arabidopsis circadian clock defines the network structure of the oscillator. Science336, 75–79. 10.1126/science.1219075
54
HuijserC.KortsteeA.PegoJ.WeisbeekP.WismanE.SmeekensS. (2000). The Arabidopsis SUCROSE UNCOUPLED-6 gene is identical to ABSCISIC ACID INSENSITIVE4: involvement of abscisic acid in sugar responses. Plant J.23, 577–585. 10.1046/j.1365-313x.2000.00822.x
55
ItoS.NiwaY.NakamichiN.KawamuraH.YamashinoT.MizunoT. (2008). Insight into missing genetic links between two evening-expressed pseudo-response regulator genes TOC1 and PRR5 in the circadian clock-controlled circuitry in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Cell Physiol.49, 201–213. 10.1093/pcp/pcm178
56
JenkinsG. I. (2014). The UV-B photoreceptor UVR8: from structure to physiology. Plant Cell26, 21–37. 10.1105/tpc.113.119446
57
JohnsonE.BradleyM.HarberdN. P.WhitelamG. C. (1994). Photoresponses of light-grown phyA mutants of Arabidopsis (phytochrome A is required for the perception of daylength extensions). Plant Physiol.105, 141–149. 10.1104/pp.105.1.141
58
JumteeK.OkazawaA.HaradaK.FukusakiE.TakanoM.KobayashiA. (2009). Comprehensive metabolite profiling of phyA phyB phyC triple mutants to reveal their associated metabolic phenotype in rice leaves. J. Biosci. Bioeng.108, 151–159. 10.1016/j.jbiosc.2009.03.010
59
JungJ. H.SeoP. J.KangS. K.ParkC. M. (2011). miR172 signals are incorporated into the miR156 signaling pathway at the SPL3/4/5 genes in Arabidopsis developmental transitions. Plant Mol. Biol.76, 35–45. 10.1007/s11103-011-9759-z
60
JungJ. H.SeoY. H.SeoP. J.ReyesJ. L.YunJ.ChuaN. H.et al. (2007). The GIGANTEA-regulated microRNA172 mediates photoperiodic flowering independent of CONSTANS in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell19, 2736–2748. 10.1105/tpc.107.054528
61
KamiC.LorrainS.HornitschekP.FankhauserC. (2010). Light-regulated plant growth and development. Curr. Top. Dev. Biol.91, 29–66. 10.1016/S0070-2153(10)91002-8
62
KaplanF.GuyC. L. (2005). RNA interference of Arabidopsis beta-amylase8 prevents maltose accumulation upon cold shock and increases sensitivity of PSII photochemical efficiency to freezing stress. Plant J.44, 730–743. 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2005.02565.x
63
KaplanF.SungD. Y.GuyC. L. (2006). Roles of β-amylase and starch breakdown during temperatures stress. Physiol. Plant.126, 120–128. 10.1111/j.1399-3054.2006.00604.x
64
KardailskyI.ShuklaV. K.AhnJ. H.DagenaisN.ChristensenS. K.NguyenJ. T.et al. (1999). Activation tagging of the floral inducer FT. Science286, 1962–1965. 10.1126/science.286.5446.1962
65
KimW. Y.FujiwaraS.SuhS. S.KimJ.KimY.HanL.et al. (2007). ZEITLUPE is a circadian photoreceptor stabilized by GIGANTEA in blue light. Nature449, 356–360. 10.1038/nature06132
66
KingR.HisamatsuT.GoldschmidtE. E.BlundellC. (2008). The nature of floral signals in Arabidopsis. I. Photosynthesis and a far-red photoresponse independently regulate flowering by increasing expression of FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT). J. Exp. Bot.59, 3811–3820. 10.1093/jxb/ern231
67
KnightH.ThomsonA. J.McwattersH. G. (2008). Sensitive to freezing6 integrates cellular and environmental inputs to the plant circadian clock. Plant Physiol.148, 293–303. 10.1104/pp.108.123901
68
KobayashiY.KayaH.GotoK.IwabuchiM.ArakiT. (1999). A pair of related genes with antagonistic roles in mediating flowering signals. Science286, 1960–1962. 10.1126/science.286.5446.1960
69
KoornneefM.HanhartC. J.VanderveenJ. H. (1991). A genetic and physiological analysis of late flowering mutants in Arabidopsis thaliana. Mol. Gen. Genet.229, 57–66. 10.1007/BF00264213
70
KoornneefM.RolffE.SpruitC. (1980). Genetic control of light-inhibited hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis thaliana (L.) Get the document, find related information or use other SFX services. Z. Pflanzenphysiol.100, 147–160. 10.1016/S0044-328X(80)80208-X
71
KozukaT.HoriguchiG.KimG. T.OhgishiM.SakaiT.TsukayaH. (2005). The different growth responses of the Arabidopsis thaliana leaf blade and the petiole during shade avoidance are regulated by Photoreceptors and sugar. Plant Cell Physiol.46, 213–223. 10.1093/pcp/pci016
72
LaoN. T.SchoneveldO.MouldR. M.HibberdJ. M.GrayJ. C.KavanaghT. A. (1999). An Arabidopsis gene encoding a chloroplast-targeted beta-amylase. Plant J.20, 519–527. 10.1046/j.1365-313X.1999.00625.x
73
LastdragerJ.HansonJ.SmeekensS. (2014). Sugar signals and the control of plant growth and development. J. Exp. Bot.65, 799–807. 10.1093/jxb/ert474
74
LauterN.KampaniA.CarlsonS.GoebelM.MooseS. P. (2005). microRNA172 down-regulates glossy15 to promote vegetative phase change in maize. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.102, 9412–9417. 10.1073/pnas.0503927102
75
LeeH.YooS. J.LeeJ. H.KimW.YooS. K.FitzgeraldH.et al. (2010). Genetic framework for flowering-time regulation by ambient temperature-responsive miRNAs in Arabidopsis. Nucleic Acids Res.38, 3081–3093. 10.1093/nar/gkp1240
76
LeeJ.HeK.StolcV.LeeH.FigueroaP.GaoY.et al. (2007). Analysis of transcription factor HY5 genomic binding sites revealed its hierarchical role in light regulation of development. Plant Cell19, 731–749. 10.1105/tpc.106.047688
77
LiL.SheenJ. (2016). Dynamic and diverse sugar signaling. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol.33, 116–125. 10.1016/j.pbi.2016.06.018
78
LiY.LeeK. K.WalshS.SmithC.HadinghamS.SorefanK.et al. (2006). Establishing glucose- and ABA-regulated transcription networks in Arabidopsis by microarray analysis and promoter classification using a Relevance Vector Machine. Genome Res.16, 414–427. 10.1101/gr.4237406
79
LifschitzE.AyreB. G.EshedY. (2014). Florigen and anti-florigen-a systemic mechanism for coordinating growth and termination in flowering plants. Front. Plant Sci.5:465. 10.3389/fpls.2014.00465
80
LiuH.WangQ.LiuY.ZhaoX.ImaizumiT.SomersD. E.et al. (2013). Arabidopsis CRY2 and ZTL mediate blue-light regulation of the transcription factor CIB1 by distinct mechanisms. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.110, 17582–17587. 10.1073/pnas.1308987110
81
LiuH.YuX.LiK.KlejnotJ.YangH.LisieroD.et al. (2008). Photoexcited CRY2 interacts with CIB1 to regulate transcription and floral initiation in Arabidopsis. Science322, 1535–1539. 10.1126/science.1163927
82
LiuY.LiX.LiK.LiuH.LinC. (2013). Multiple bHLH proteins form heterodimers to mediate CRY2-dependent regulation of flowering-time in Arabidopsis. PLoS Genet.9:e1003861. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1003861
83
LunnJ. E.FeilR.HendriksJ. H.GibonY.MorcuendeR.OsunaD.et al. (2006). Sugar-induced increases in trehalose 6-phosphate are correlated with redox activation of ADPglucose pyrophosphorylase and higher rates of starch synthesis in Arabidopsis thaliana. Biochem. J.397, 139–148. 10.1042/BJ20060083
84
MartinA.AdamH.Diaz-MendozaM.ZurczakM.Gonzalez-SchainN. D.Suarez-LopezP. (2009). Graft-transmissible induction of potato tuberization by the microRNA miR172. Development136, 2873–2881. 10.1242/dev.031658
85
MasP.DevlinP. F.PandaS.KayS. A. (2000). Functional interaction of phytochrome B and cryptochrome 2. Nature408, 207–211. 10.1038/35041583
86
MathieuJ.YantL. J.MurdterF.KuttnerF.SchmidM. (2009). Repression of flowering by the miR172 target SMZ. PLoS Biol.7:e1000148. 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000148
87
MatsoukasI. G. (2014a). Attainment of reproductive competence, phase transition, and quantification of juvenility in mutant genetic screens. Front. Plant Sci.5:32. 10.3389/fpls.2014.00032
88
MatsoukasI. G. (2014b). Interplay between sugar and hormone signaling pathways modulate floral signal transduction. Front. Genet.5:218. 10.3389/fgene.2014.00218
89
MatsoukasI. G. (2015). Florigens and antiflorigens: a molecular genetic understanding. Essays Biochem.58, 133–149. 10.1042/bse0580133
90
MatsoukasI. G.MassiahA. J.ThomasB. (2012). Florigenic and antiflorigenic signalling in plants. Plant Cell Physiol.53, 1827–1842. 10.1093/pcp/pcs130
91
MatsoukasI. G.MassiahA. J.ThomasB. (2013). Starch metabolism and antiflorigenic signals modulate the juvenile-to-adult phase transition in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell Environ.36, 1802–1811. 10.1111/pce.12088
92
MatsushikaA.MakinoS.KojimaM.MizunoT. (2000). Circadian waves of expression of the APRR1/TOC1 family of pseudo-response regulators in Arabidopsis thaliana: insight into the plant circadian clock. Plant Cell Physiol.41, 1002–1012. 10.1093/pcp/pcd043
93
MattsonN.ErwinJ. (2005). The impact of photoperiod and irradiance on flowering of several herbaceous ornamentals. Sci. Horticult.104, 275–292. 10.1016/j.scienta.2004.08.018
94
MayP.LiaoW.WuY.ShuaiB.MccombieW. R.ZhangM. Q.et al. (2013). The effects of carbon dioxide and temperature on microRNA expression in Arabidopsis development. Nat. Commun.4:2145. 10.1038/ncomms3145
95
MccallumC. M.ComaiL.GreeneE. A.HenikoffS. (2000). Targeted screening for induced mutations. Nat. Biotechnol.18, 455–457. 10.1038/74542
96
MicallefB. J.HaskinsK. A.VanderveerP. J.RohK. S.ShewmakerC. K.SharkeyT. D. (1995). Altered photosynthesis, flowering, and fruiting in transgenic tomato plants that have an increased capacity for sucrose synthesis. Planta196, 327–334. 10.1007/BF00201392
97
MooreB.ZhouL.RollandF.HallQ.ChengW. H.LiuY. X.et al. (2003). Role of the Arabidopsis glucose sensor HXK1 in nutrient, light, and hormonal signaling. Science300, 332–336. 10.1126/science.1080585
98
MozleyD.ThomasB. (1995). Developmental and photobiological factors affecting photoperiodic induction in Arabidopsis thaliana Heynh Landsberg erecta. J. Exp. Bot.46, 173–179. 10.1093/jxb/46.2.173
99
NakamichiN.KibaT.HenriquesR.MizunoT.ChuaN. H.SakakibaraH. (2010). PSEUDO-RESPONSE REGULATORS 9, 7, and 5 are transcriptional repressors in the Arabidopsis circadian clock. Plant Cell22, 594–605. 10.1105/tpc.109.072892
100
NakamichiN.KitaM.NiinumaK.ItoS.YamashinoT.MizoguchiT.et al. (2007). Arabidopsis clock-associated pseudo-response regulators PRR9, PRR7 and PRR5 coordinately and positively regulate flowering time through the canonical CONSTANS-dependent photoperiodic pathway. Plant Cell Physiol. 48, 822–832. 10.1093/pcp/pcm056
101
NelsonD.LasswellJ.RoggL.CohenM.BartelB. (2000). FKF1, a clock-controlled gene that regulates the transition to flowering in Arabidopsis. Cell101, 331–340. 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80842-9
102
NiittylaT.MesserliG.TrevisanM.ChenJ.SmithA. M.ZeemanS. C. (2004). A previously unknown maltose transporter essential for starch degradation in leaves. Science303, 87–89. 10.1126/science.1091811
103
NusinowD. A.HelferA.HamiltonE. E.KingJ. J.ImaizumiT.SchultzT. F.et al. (2011). The ELF4-ELF3-LUX complex links the circadian clock to diurnal control of hypocotyl growth. Nature475, 398–402. 10.1038/nature10182
104
ParkD. H.SomersD. E.KimY. S.ChoyY. H.LimH. K.SohM. S.et al. (1999). Control of circadian rhythms and photoperiodic flowering by the Arabidopsis GIGANTEA gene. Science285, 1579–1582. 10.1126/science.285.5433.1579
105
ParkJ. Y.CanamT.KangK. Y.EllisD. D.MansfieldS. D. (2008). Over-expression of an Arabidopsis family A sucrose phosphate synthase (SPS) gene alters plant growth and fibre development. Transgenic Res.17, 181–192. 10.1007/s11248-007-9090-2
106
PenfieldS.HallA. (2009). A role for multiple circadian clock genes in the response to signals that break seed dormancy in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell21, 1722–1732. 10.1105/tpc.108.064022
107
PérilleuxC.BernierG. (2002). The control of flowering: do genetical and physiological approaches converge?, in Plant Reproduction, Annual Plant Reviews, eds O'neillS. D.RobertsJ. A. (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press), 1–32.
108
PesaresiP.ScharfenbergM.WeigelM.GranlundI.SchroderW. P.FinazziG.et al. (2009). Mutants, overexpressors, and interactors of Arabidopsis plastocyanin isoforms: revised roles of plastocyanin in photosynthetic electron flow and thylakoid redox state. Mol. Plant2, 236–248. 10.1093/mp/ssn041
109
PokhilkoA.FernandezA. P.EdwardsK. D.SouthernM. M.HallidayK. J.MillarA. J. (2012). The clock gene circuit in Arabidopsis includes a repressilator with additional feedback loops. Mol. Syst. Biol.8:574. 10.1038/msb.2012.6
110
PolgeC.ThomasM. (2007). SNF1/AMPK/SnRK1 kinases, global regulators at the heart of energy control?Trends Plant Sci. 12, 20–28. 10.1016/j.tplants.2006.11.005
111
PonnuJ.WahlV.SchmidM. (2011). Trehalose-6-phosphate: connecting plant metabolism and development. Front. Plant Sci.2:70. 10.3389/fpls.2011.00070
112
ReedJ.NagataniA.ElichT.FaganM.ChoryJ. (1994). Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in Arabidopsis development. Plant Physiol.1139–1149. 10.1104/pp.104.4.1139
113
RenM.VenglatP.QiuS.FengL.CaoY.WangE.et al. (2012). Target of rapamycin signaling regulates metabolism, growth, and life span in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell24, 4850–4874. 10.1105/tpc.112.107144
114
RizziniL.FavoryJ. J.CloixC.FaggionatoD.O'haraA.KaiserliE.et al. (2011). Perception of UV-B by the Arabidopsis UVR8 protein. Science332, 103–106. 10.1126/science.1200660
115
RollandF.Baena-GonzalezE.SheenJ. (2006). Sugar sensing and signaling in plants: conserved and novel mechanisms. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol.57, 675–709. 10.1146/annurev.arplant.57.032905.105441
116
RomanowskiA.YanovskyM. J. (2015). Circadian rhythms and post-transcriptional regulation in higher plants. Front. Plant Sci.6:437. 10.3389/fpls.2015.00437
117
SanchezS. E.KayS. A. (2016). The plant circadian clock: from a simple timekeeper to a complex developmental manager. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol.8:a027748. 10.1101/cshperspect.a027748
118
SchafferR.RamsayN.SamachA.CordenS.PutterillJ.CarreI. A.et al. (1998). The late elongated hypocotyl mutation of Arabidopsis disrupts circadian rhythms and the photoperiodic control of flowering. Cell93, 1219–1229. 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81465-8
119
SchultzT.KiyosueT.YanovskyM.WadaM.KayS. (2001). A role for LKP2 in the circadian clock of Arabidopsis. Plant Cell13, 2659–2670. 10.1105/tpc.13.12.2659
120
SchulzeW. X.ReindersA.WardJ. M.LalondeS.FrommerW. B. (2003). Interactions between co-expressed Arabidopsis sucrose transporters in the split-ubiquitin system. BMC Biochem.4:3. 10.1186/1471-2091-4-3
121
SchwarzS.GrandeA. V.BujdosoN.SaedlerH.HuijserP. (2008). The microRNA regulated SBP-box genes SPL9 and SPL15 control shoot maturation in Arabidopsis. Plant Mol. Biol.67, 183–195. 10.1007/s11103-008-9310-z
122
SeoP. J.RyuJ.KangS. K.ParkC. M. (2011). Modulation of sugar metabolism by an INDETERMINATE DOMAIN transcription factor contributes to photoperiodic flowering in Arabidopsis. Plant J.65, 418–429. 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2010.04432.x
123
SharkeyT. D.VasseyT. L.VanderveerP. J.VierstraR. D. (1991). Carbon metabolism enzymes and photosynthesis in transgenic tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) having excess phytochrome. Planta185, 287–296. 10.1007/BF00201046
124
ShikataM.KoyamaT.MitsudaN.Ohme-TakagiM. (2009). Arabidopsis SBP-box genes SPL10, SPL11 and SPL2 control morphological change in association with shoot maturation in the reproductive phase. Plant Cell Physiol.50, 2133–2145. 10.1093/pcp/pcp148
125
ShikataM.YamaguchiH.SasakiK.OhtsuboN. (2012). Overexpression of Arabidopsis miR157b induces bushy architecture and delayed phase transition in Torenia fournieri. Planta236, 1027–1035. 10.1007/s00425-012-1649-3
126
ShortT. W. (1999). Overexpression of Arabidopsis phytochrome B inhibits phytochrome A function in the presence of sucrose. Plant Physiol.119, 1497–1506. 10.1104/pp.119.4.1497
127
SmeekensS. (2015). From leaf to kernel: trehalose-6-Phosphate signaling moves carbon in the field. Plant Physiol. 169, 912–913. 10.1104/pp.15.01177
128
SmeekensS.HellmannH. A. (2014). Sugar sensing and signaling in plants. Front. Plant Sci.5:113. 10.3389/fpls.2014.00113
129
SmeekensS.MaJ.HansonJ.RollandF. (2010). Sugar signals and molecular networks controlling plant growth. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol.13, 274–279. 10.1016/j.pbi.2009.12.002
130
SmithH.SamsonG.ForkD. (1993). Photosynthetic acclimation to shade: probing the role of phytochromes using photomorphogenic mutants of tomato. Plant Cell Environ.16, 929–937. 10.1111/j.1365-3040.1993.tb00516.x
131
SomersD.SchultzT.MilnamowM.KayS. (2000). ZEITLUPE encodes a novel clock-associated PAS protein from Arabidopsis. Cell101, 319–329. 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80841-7
132
SongY. H.ItoS.ImaizumiT. (2013). Flowering time regulation: photoperiod- and temperature-sensing in leaves. Trends Plant Sci.18, 575–583. 10.1016/j.tplants.2013.05.003
133
StrayerC.OyamaT.SchultzT. F.RamanR.SomersD. E.MasP.et al. (2000). Cloning of the Arabidopsis clock gene TOC1, an autoregulatory response regulator homolog. Science289, 768–771. 10.1126/science.289.5480.768
134
SuetsuguN.WadaM. (2013). Evolution of three LOV blue light receptor families in green plants and photosynthetic stramenopiles: phototropin, ZTL/FKF1/LKP2 and aureochrome. Plant Cell Physiol.54, 8–23. 10.1093/pcp/pcs165
135
TakanoM.InagakiN.XieX.KiyotaS.Baba-KasaiA.TanabataT.et al. (2009). Phytochromes are the sole photoreceptors for perceiving red/far-red light in rice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.106, 14705–14710. 10.1073/pnas.0907378106
136
TelferA.BollmanK. M.PoethigR. S. (1997). Phase change and the regulation of trichome distribution in Arabidopsis thaliana. Development124, 645–654.
137
TelferA.PoethigR. S. (1998). HASTY: a gene that regulates the timing of shoot maturation in Arabidopsis thaliana. Development125, 1889–1898.
138
ThomasB. (2006). Light signals and flowering. J. Exp. Bot.57, 3387–3393. 10.1093/jxb/erl071
139
ThomasB.Vince-PrueD. (1997). Photoperiodism in Plants. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
140
TognettiJ. A.PontisH. G.Martinez-NoelG. M. (2013). Sucrose signaling in plants: a world yet to be explored. Plant Signal. Behav.8:e23316. 10.4161/psb.23316
141
Toledo-OrtizG.JohanssonH.LeeK. P.Bou-TorrentJ.StewartK.SteelG.et al. (2014). The HY5-PIF regulatory module coordinates light and temperature control of photosynthetic gene transcription. PLoS Genet.10:e1004416. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1004416
142
TsaiA. Y.GazzarriniS. (2012). AKIN10 and FUSCA3 interact to control lateral organ development and phase transitions in Arabidopsis. Plant J. 69, 809–821. 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2011.04832.x
143
TsengT. S.SalomeP. A.McclungC. R.OlszewskiN. E. (2004). SPINDLY and GIGANTEA interact and act in Arabidopsis thaliana pathways involved in light responses, flowering, and rhythms in cotyledon movements. Plant Cell16, 1550–1563. 10.1105/tpc.019224
144
TsukayaH.OhshimaT.NaitoS.ChinoM.KomedaY. (1991). Sugar-dependent expression of the CHS-A gene for chalcone synthase from petunia in transgenic Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol.97, 1414–1421. 10.1104/pp.97.4.1414
145
TurckF.FornaraF.CouplandG. (2008). Regulation and identity of florigen: FLOWERING LOCUS T moves center stage. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol.59, 573–594. 10.1146/annurev.arplant.59.032607.092755
146
ValverdeF.MouradovA.SoppeW.RavenscroftD.SamachA.CouplandG. (2004). Photoreceptor regulation of CONSTANS protein in photoperiodic flowering. Science303, 1003–1006. 10.1126/science.1091761
147
Van den EndeW. (2014). Sugars take a central position in plant growth, development and, stress responses. A focus on apical dominance. Front. Plant Sci.5:313. 10.3389/fpls.2014.00313
148
Van DijkenA. J.SchluepmannH.SmeekensS. C. (2004). Arabidopsis trehalose-6-phosphate synthase 1 is essential for normal vegetative growth and transition to flowering. Plant Physiol.135, 969–977. 10.1104/pp.104.039743
149
Varkonyi-GasicE.GouldN.SandanayakaM.SutherlandP.MacdiarmidR. M. (2010). Characterisation of microRNAs from apple (Malus domestica 'Royal Gala') vascular tissue and phloem sap. BMC Plant Biol.10:159. 10.1186/1471-2229-10-159
150
WahlV.PonnuJ.SchlerethA.ArrivaultS.LangeneckerT.FrankeA.et al. (2013). Regulation of flowering by trehalose-6-phosphate signaling in Arabidopsis thaliana. Science339, 704–707. 10.1126/science.1230406
151
WaltersR. G.RogersJ. J.ShephardF.HortonP. (1999). Acclimation of Arabidopsis thaliana to the light environment: the role of photoreceptors. Planta209, 517–527. 10.1007/s004250050756
152
WangJ.-W.CzechB.WeigelD. (2009). miR156-regulated SPL transcription factors define an endogenous flowering pathway in Arabidopsis thaliana. Cell138, 738–749. 10.1016/j.cell.2009.06.014
153
WangJ. W.SchwabR.CzechB.MicaE.WeigelD. (2008). Dual effects of miR156-targeted SPL genes and CYP78A5/KLUH on plastochron length and organ size in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Cell20, 1231–1243. 10.1105/tpc.108.058180
154
WangZ. Y.TobinE. M. (1998). Constitutive expression of the CIRCADIAN CLOCK ASSOCIATED 1 (CCA1) gene disrupts circadian rhythms and suppresses its own expression. Cell93, 1207–1217. 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81464-6
155
WendenB.Kozma-BognarL.EdwardsK. D.HallA. J. W.LockeJ. C. W.MillarA. J. (2011). Light inputs shape the Arabidopsis circadian system. Plant J.66, 480–491. 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2011.04505.x
156
WenkelS.TurckF.SingerK.GissotL.Le GourrierecJ.SamachA.et al. (2006). CONSTANS and the CCAAT box binding complex share a functionally important domain and interact to regulate flowering of Arabidopsis. Plant Cell18, 2971–2984. 10.1105/tpc.106.043299
157
WhitelamG.JohnsonE.PengJ.CarolP.AndersonM.CowlJ. E. A. (1993). Phytochrome A null mutants of Arabidopsis display a wild-type phenotype in white light. Plant Cell5, 757–768. 10.1105/tpc.5.7.757
158
WuG.ParkM. Y.ConwayS. R.WangJ. W.WeigelD.PoethigR. S. (2009). The sequential action of miR156 and miR172 regulates developmental timing in Arabidopsis. Cell138, 750–759. 10.1016/j.cell.2009.06.031
159
WuG.PoethigR. S. (2006). Temporal regulation of shoot development in Arabidopsis thaliana by miR156 and its target SPL3. Development133, 3539–3547. 10.1242/dev.02521
160
XingL. B.ZhangD.LiY. M.ShenY. W.ZhaoC. P.MaJ. J.et al. (2015). Transcription profiles reveal sugar and hormone signaling pathways mediating flower induction in Apple (Malus domestica Borkh.). Plant Cell Physiol.56, 2052–2068. 10.1093/pcp/pcv124
161
XingS.SalinasM.HohmannS.BerndtgenR.HuijserP. (2010). miR156-targeted and nontargeted SBP-box transcription factors act in concert to secure male fertility in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell22, 3935–3950. 10.1105/tpc.110.079343
162
XuD.LiJ.GangappaS. N.HettiarachchiC.LinF.AnderssonM. X.et al. (2014). Convergence of light and ABA signaling on the ABI5 promoter. PLoS Genet.10:e1004197. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1004197
163
YadavU. P.IvakovA.FeilR.DuanG. Y.WaltherD.GiavaliscoP.et al. (2014). The sucrose-trehalose 6-phosphate (Tre6P) nexus: specificity and mechanisms of sucrose signalling by Tre6P. J. Exp. Bot.65, 1051–1068. 10.1093/jxb/ert457
164
YamaguchiA.KobayashiY.GotoK.AbeM.ArakiT. (2005). TWIN SISTER OF FT (TSF) acts as a floral pathway integrator redundantly with FT. Plant Cell Physiol.46, 1175–1189. 10.1093/pcp/pci151
165
YamaguchiA.WuM. F.YangL.WuG.PoethigR. S.WagnerD. (2009). The microRNA-regulated SBP-Box transcription factor SPL3 is a direct upstream activator of LEAFY, FRUITFULL, and APETALA1. Dev. Cell17, 268–278. 10.1016/j.devcel.2009.06.007
166
YanovskyM. J.Alconada-MaglianoT. M.MazzellaM. A.GatzC.ThomasB.CasalJ. J. (1998). Phytochrome A affects stem growth, anthocyanin synthesis, sucrose-phosphate-synthase activity and neighbour detection in sunlight-grown potato. Planta205, 235–241. 10.1007/s004250050316
167
YanovskyM. J.KayS. A. (2002). Molecular basis of seasonal time measurement in Arabidopsis. Nature419, 308–312. 10.1038/nature00996
168
YantL.MathieuJ.DinhT. T.OttF.LanzC.WollmannH.et al. (2010). Orchestration of the floral transition and floral development in Arabidopsis by the bifunctional transcription factor APETALA2. Plant Cell22, 2156–2170. 10.1105/tpc.110.075606
169
ZeevaartJ. A. D. (1985). Bryophyllum, in Handbook of Flowering, ed HalevyA. H. (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press Inc), 89–100.
170
ZhangB.WangL.ZengL.ZhangC.MaH. (2015). Arabidopsis TOE proteins convey a photoperiodic signal to antagonize CONSTANS and regulate flowering time. Genes Dev.29, 975–987. 10.1101/gad.251520.114
171
ZhangD.ArmitageA.AffolterJ.DirrM. (1996). Environmental control of flowering and growth of Achillea millefolium L. ‘summer pastels’. HortScience31, 364–365.
172
ZhangH.HeH.WangX.WangX.YangX.LiL.et al. (2011). Genome-wide mapping of the HY5-mediated gene networks in Arabidopsis that involve both transcriptional and post-transcriptional regulation. Plant J.65, 346–358. 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2010.04426.x
173
ZhangY.PrimavesiL. F.JhurreeaD.AndralojcP. J.MitchellR. A.PowersS. J.et al. (2009). Inhibition of SNF1-related protein kinase1 activity and regulation of metabolic pathways by trehalose-6-phosphate. Plant Physiol.149, 1860–1871. 10.1104/pp.108.133934
Summary
Keywords
cryptochromes, developmental phase transitions, floral signal transduction, florigen, juvenile-to-adult phase transition, photoreceptors, phytochromes, sugar signaling
Citation
Matsoukas IG (2017) Crosstalk between Photoreceptor and Sugar Signaling Modulates Floral Signal Transduction. Front. Physiol. 8:382. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2017.00382
Received
15 December 2016
Accepted
22 May 2017
Published
12 June 2017
Volume
8 - 2017
Edited by
Wim Van den Ende, KU Leuven, Belgium
Reviewed by
Matthew Paul, Rothamsted Research (BBSRC), United Kingdom; Gaurav Zinta, Shanghai Center for Plant Stress Biology (PSC), CAS, China; Soulaiman Sakr, Agrocampus Ouest, France
Updates
Copyright
© 2017 Matsoukas.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Ianis G. Matsoukas i.matsoukas@bolton.ac.uk
†Present Address: Ianis G. Matsoukas, School of Sport and Biological Sciences, University of Bolton, Bolton, United Kingdom
This article was submitted to Plant Physiology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Physiology
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.