Figures
Abstract
The eukaryotic translation elongation factor eEF-1Bβ1 (EF1Bβ) is a guanine nucleotide exchange factor that plays an important role in translation elongation. In this study, we show that the EF1Bβ protein is localized in the plasma membrane and cytoplasm, and that the transcripts should be expressed in most tissue types in seedlings. Sectioning of the inflorescence stem revealed that EF1Bβ predominantly localizes to the xylem vessels and in the interfascicular cambium. EF1Bβ gene silencing in efβ caused a dwarf phenotype with 38% and 20% reduction in total lignin and crystalline cellulose, respectively. This loss-of-function mutant also had a lower S/G lignin monomer ratio relative to wild type plants, but no changes were detected in a gain-of-function mutant transformed with the EF1Bβ gene. Histochemical analysis showed a reduced vascular apparatus, including smaller xylem vessels in the inflorescence stem of the loss-of-function mutant. Over-expression of EF1Bβ in an eli1 mutant background restored a WT phenotype and abolished ectopic lignin deposition as well as cell expansion defects in the mutant. Taken together, these data strongly suggest a role for EF1Bβ in plant development and cell wall formation in Arabidopsis.
Citation: Hossain Z, Amyot L, McGarvey B, Gruber M, Jung J, Hannoufa A (2012) The Translation Elongation Factor eEF-1Bβ1 Is Involved in Cell Wall Biosynthesis and Plant Development in Arabidopsis thaliana. PLoS ONE 7(1): e30425. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0030425
Editor: Edward Newbigin, University of Melbourne, Australia
Received: September 9, 2011; Accepted: December 16, 2011; Published: January 17, 2012
Copyright: © 2012 Hossain et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Funding: Funding was provided by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada through the ABIP program and the CBioN Network Project #159 (www.4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1289590845916). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
Translation is one of the vital processes involved in the fine regulation of gene expression through ensuring direct, rapid, reversible and spatial control of protein concentration [1], and thereby affects developmental processes in both prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Translation elongation in eukaryotes requires a set of soluble non-ribosomal proteins known as eukaryotic elongation factors or eEFs [2]. They include eEF1A and eEF1B factors, which are involved in the recruitment of aminoacyl-tRNAs onto the ribosome, and eEF2 factor, which mediates ribosomal translocation. eEF1B is essential for growth [3] and plays a role in oxidative stress resistance in yeast [4]. eEF1B is also involved in distributing eEF1A between polypeptide chain elongation and actin-binding activities [5], and in cell cycle regulation [6].
The plant eEF1B is a trimer composed of the structural protein (eEF1Bγ) plus two nucleotide exchange subunits (eEF1Bα and eEF1Bβ) [6] and is intermediate in complexity between yeast and metazoans. The yeast eEF1B is made up of two subunits, a guanine nucleotide exchange protein (eEF1Bα) and a structural protein (eEF1Bγ), whereas the metazoan complex is a heteromer of at least four subunits: the structural protein (eEF1Bγ), two nucleotide exchange factors (eEF1Bα and eEF1Bδ), plus the unique valine-tRNA synthetase (Val-RS) [6]. The nucleotide exchange function is achieved primarily by the eEF1Bα isoform, and the exact physiological functions of eEF1Bβ and eEF1Bδ are not yet known.
The plant cell wall is a complex and dynamic structure composed of polysaccharides (cellulose and hemi-cellulose), proteins, and phenolic compounds (primarily lignin, but also other phenolic acid linkages) [7]. The cell wall not only strengthens the plant body, but also plays key roles in plant growth, cell differentiation, intercellular communication, water movement and defense [8]. Disruption of either cellulose or lignin biosynthetic and regulatory genes leads to stunted phenotypes, irregular xylem development and weak stem formation [9], [10], but the link between disruption of monolignol biosynthesis and dwarfism is not clearly established [10]. Recently, a direct relationship between cell wall biosynthesis and cytoskeleton was reported [11], [12]. This was significant in light of the physical interaction established earlier between eEF1β and actin in the cytoskeleton of Dictyostelium discoideum [13].
In this study, we investigated the role of eEF-1Bβ1 (locus At1g30230, referred to hereafter as EF1Bβ) in plant development by studying changes in cell wall structure and composition within a dwarfed T-DNA insertion line, SALK_046102C [14]; referred to hereafter as efβ, as a result of the mis-expression of the EF1Bβ gene. We also investigated the impact of EF1Bβ over-expression in the Arabidopsis ectopic lignification 1 (allele eli1-1, hereafter eli1) mutant. This plant line has a mutation within cellulose synthase CESA3 and exhibits ectopic lignification in cells normally free of lignin [15]. Using these genetic tools, we show that EF1Bβ not only affects plant growth and cell elongation, but also plays a role in the biosynthesis of cellulose and lignin and points to EF1Bβ as a novel regulator of plant development and cell wall biosynthesis.
Materials and Methods
Plant materials and growth conditions
SALK_046102C seeds were obtained from the Arabidopsis Biological Resource Center (ABRC), Ohio State University, USA [14]. Plants from this accession were mutated in the EF1Bβ gene (At1g30230) and did not show any phenotype until the following generation, when we observed 11 plants (efβ) with strong dwarf phenotypes out of 40 plants, indicating that the original SALK_046102C line was heterozygous. The eli1 mutant line was obtained from Dr. D. Bonetta at the University of Ontario Institute of Technology, Oshawa, Canada. Arabidopsis thaliana, ecotype Columbia (Col 0), and mutant lines eli1 [15] and efβ were grown in Promix BX (www.premierhort.com) in a growth room (16-h light/8-h dark) under fluorescent white light (150 µmol m−2 s−1) at 22°C after stratification at 4°C for 48 hr to synchronize germination. For plate-grown seedlings, sterilized seeds were sown on 0.5× MS medium with 1% sucrose in the light, or without sucrose in the darkness. For growth in the dark, seeds were exposed to fluorescent white light (150 µmol m−2 s−1) at 22°C for 6 hr to induce germination, after which the plates were wrapped individually with aluminum foil. The age of the seedlings was defined starting at the end of the cold treatment.
Mutant genotyping
Segregating plants from SALK_046102C seeds were used for T-DNA analysis and to develop the homozygous line, efβ. The homozygous dwarf plants were used in all subsequent analysis. The T-DNA insertion into the EF1Bβ gene was confirmed in efβ plants by PCR with T-DNA border and gene-specific primers (LBb1.3, LP and RP; Table S1) designed by SIGnAL T-DNA Verification Primer Design Tool (Salk Institute Genomic Analysis Laboratory, CA, USA). To determine the nature of the mutation and T-DNA copy number, the mutant was backcrossed to the WT (Col 0) and the presence of T-DNA in BC1F1 plants was confirmed by PCR. BC1F2 seeds were obtained from BC1F1 plants through selfing. BC1F2 seeds from four individual plants were grown for characterization of the efβ mutant. Genotyping of the eli1 mutant was carried out previously by others [15], [16].
Plasmid construction and transformation
The promoter and 5′-UTR of EF1Bβ (1931-bp fragment including the start codon ATG) was amplified from Arabidopsis genomic DNA by PCR (primers P1+P2, Table S1) and cloned into the Gateway entry vector pENTR/D-TOPO (Invitrogen). The promoter was recombined into the Gateway destination vector pMDC163 containing UidA gene [17] through an LR clonase reaction (Invitrogen). The coding region of EF1Bβ was amplified by PCR (primers P3+P4, Table S1) from Arabidopsis cDNA and cloned into pGEM-T Easy vector (Promega), then transferred into the binary vector pBINPLUS-35S as a BamHI and SacI fragment to generate the over-expression construct EFβOX. To generate a translational fusion, EF1Bβ cDNA without the stop codon was amplified by PCR (primers P5+P6, Table S1) from Arabidopsis leaf cDNA, cloned into pENTR/D-TOPO; then the insert was transferred into the pEarleyGate 101 vector upstream of the yellow fluorescence protein (YFP) [18] using the Gateway recombination system (Invitrogen) to create the 35S-EF1Bβ-YFP construct. All clones were confirmed by sequencing.
The constructed vectors were electroporated into Agrobacterium tumefaciens strain LBA4404 except for 35S-EF1Bβ-YFP, which was introduced into GV3101. Arabidopsis plants were transformed by the floral-dip method [19]. For the complementation study, the EFβOX construct was introduced into efβ and eli1 mutant lines by the same method. Transgenic Arabidopsis seedlings were selected on growth medium containing 0.5× Murashige and Skoog salt mixture (PhytoTechnology Laboratories, KS, USA), 1% (w/v) sucrose (pH 5.8), and 0.8% (w/v) plant agar (Sigma) supplemented with 25 mg/l hygromycin or 50 mg/l kanamycin. Plants positive for the T-DNA were further confirmed by PCR.
Confocal microscopy
Roots of four-day-old Arabidopsis seedlings that were transformed with the EF1Bβ-YFP fusion construct were examined on a DM IRE2 inverted microscope equipped with an HCX PL APO 1.20 63X water-immersion objective. Images were collected in a 512×512 format on a TCS SP2 confocal system (Leica Microsystems) using a scanning speed of 400 Hz. YFP was visualized by exciting the samples with the 514 nm argon laser line and collecting fluorescence with an emission window set at 520-580 nm. To plasmolyze the cells, seedlings were incubated in ½ MS containing 0.75 M sorbitol for 15 minutes, and then incubated in 8 µM SynaptoRed™ Reagent (SR) (Calbiochem) for 5 minutes to stain the plasma membrane.
β-glucuronidase (GUS) histochemical assay
For the GUS staining assay, 12-day-old seedlings grown on MS media and tissue collected from the base of the inflorescence stem from 6-week-old plants grown on soil were tested with 5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl glucuronide according to Hématy et al. at 37°C for 4 h [20]. Stem pieces were mounted in 3% agarose, and 30 µm sections were prepared using a Leica VT1000S vibratome (www.leica.com). Seedlings and sections were visualized with Nikon SMZ 1500 and Zeiss Axioskop 2 plus microscopes, and images were captured using a NIKON DXM 1200 digital camera.
Histochemical staining for lignin
For phloroglucinol staining, 5-day-old dark grown seedlings or 30 µm sections from the base of the inflorescence stems were stained with 2% phloroglucinol in 95% ethanol and concentrated HCl (v/v, 2:1) for 5 min. For Mäule staining, 100 µm sections were treated for 10 min with 1% KMnO4 and then rinsed with water. Sections were then treated for 3 min with 10% HCl, rinsed in water, and mounted in concentrated NH4OH. For anatomical analysis of eli1 and eli1-EFβOX plants, 30 µm sections from the base of 6-week-old inflorescence stem were treated with 0.02% aqueous solution of Toluidine Blue. All samples were observed under a light microscope and photographed using a NIKON DXM 1200 digital camera.
Lignin content and monomeric composition analysis
Total lignin from the inflorescence stem was determined using the thioglycolic acid (TGA) method according to Brinkmann et al. [21] with slight modifications. Briefly, cell wall residue (CWR) was prepared by extracting the ground stem with toluene/ethanol (2∶1, v/v), 95% ethanol, and water (three times each). Extractive-free CWR was dried at 70°C overnight. Aliquots of 10 mg dried CWR (3 replicates per individual sample) were weighed into 2 ml screw cap tubes (Sarstedt) and mixed with 1.5 ml of 2 N HCl and 0.3 ml thioglycolic acid (TGA). Subsequent analysis was carried out as per Brinkmann et al. [21], and the relative amount of lignin was measured considering WT absorbance at 280 nm as 100%.
Lignin monomer composition was determined using thioacidolysis as described by Foster et al. [22], except that 10 mg of CWR was used as the starting material and all reagents were scaled up accordingly. We used an Agilent 7890 GC/5975 MSD with an HP-5MS column (Agilent, 30 m × 0.25 mm i.d., 0.25 µm film thickness) for monolignol analysis. Total ion chromatogram peaks were identified by relative retention times using tetracosane as an internal standard, as well as by determining characteristic mass spectrum ions of 299 m/z and 269 m/z for syringyl (S) and guaiacyl (G) monomers, respectively. The relative composition of the lignin components was quantified by setting the total peak area of the lignin peaks to 100%.
Cellulose content analysis
Cellulose content was determined using a colorimetric method [23] and expressed as µg cellulose mg−1 DW.
Quantitative real-time RT-PCR
For quantitative real time reverse transcription PCR (qRT-PCR) experiments, total RNA was extracted from 6-week-old inflorescence stems using TRIzol reagent (Invitrogen). RNA was treated with Turbo DNAse (www.ambion.com) to eliminate trace amounts of genomic DNA. Reverse transcription reactions were performed with Superscript™ III Reverse Transcriptase (Invitrogen) using 2.0 µg of RNA per reaction; then the cDNA was diluted 25-fold with nuclease-free water. Polymerase chain reactions were carried out in a 96-well plate in a LightCycler® 480 II (http://www.roche-applied-science.com/lightcycler) using SYBR® Green Master Mix (Roche) in a reaction volume of 20 µl. Five reference genes [adenine phosphorybosyl transferase 1 (At1g27450), elongation factor EF1α (At5g60390), eukaryotic initiation factor elF4A1 (At3g13920), UBC21 (At5g25760), and UBQ10 (At4g05320)] were tested in the experiment, and the two most stable genes (EF1α and elF4A1) were selected for data normalization using geNorm software [24]. PCR efficiency was determined from amplification plots using the program LinRegPCR [25].
Results
Sub-cellular localization of EF1Bβ protein to the plasma membrane
To investigate the subcellular localization of EF1Bβ, we transformed Arabidopsis plants with a translational fusion of EF1Bβ and the yellow fluorescent protein (EF1Bβ::YFP) under the control of the 35S promoter. YFP fluorescence was observed in the cytosol and periphery of epidermal cells of the root tips of stably transformed seedlings (Figure 1A–C). Following plasmolysis with sorbitol, EF1Bβ::YFP localization remained clearly visible in the plasma membrane and cytosol (Figure 1D–F). These results are consistent with the results of proteomics studies that predicted EF1Bβ to be a plasma membrane [26], [27] as well as a cytosolic [28] protein. However, in some transformed lines, bright yellow dot like aggregates were observed in the cytoplasm after plasmolysis (Figure S1). It is possible that EF1Bβ::YFP protein partially coagulated at high expression levels because of plasmolysis although this phenomenon remains to be elucidated.
SynaptoRed (SR) was used as a plasma membrane marker (B and F). Panels C and G are the merged images of the YFP and SR channels and D and H show the DIC images. Lower panels (E-H) show a close-up of root tip cells. Bars = 10 µm. Arrowheads (A and E) highlight the YFP localization in the cell periphery.
Expression of EF1Bβ promoter in seedlings and inflorescence stem
To investigate the expression pattern of EF1Bβ, 1931 bp upstream sequence containing the putative promoter region and 5′-UTR of EF1Bβ was fused to the UidA reporter gene expressing GUS, and the construct was introduced into Arabidopsis plants. Twelve-day-old seedlings from 10 independent lines showed ubiquitous GUS staining activity throughout the plant (Figure 2A,B,C,D,E) although the expression was relatively low in hypocotyls. GUS activity was most intense in the elongating zones, such as just above the root tips (Figure 2C). Sections from the basal part of the inflorescence stem of 6-week-old plants were used to analyze promoter expression in the vascular elements. GUS activity was mainly concentrated in the vascular bundles, particularly in the xylem and phloem, and in the interfascicular cambium region (Figure 2F). Flower and silique epidermis layers showed fairly strong expression, with the strongest expression in the pistil and stamens (Figure 2G, H), but almost no expression was observed in the seeds (Figure 2I). In summary, GUS expression was highest in elongating cells and in vascular tissues, indicating that EF1Bβ might be associated with cell wall biosynthesis in interfascicular and xylary fibers in addition to its role in translation elongation.
Transgenic Arabidopsis plants expressing EF1Bβpromoter-UidA reporter fusion were examined histochemically for GUS activity. Seedling (A), hypocotyl (B), root tip (C), root hairs (D), trichomes (E), cross section of inflorescence stem (F), flower (G), silique epidermis (H), and fully developed seed (I). Cross section of the stem (F) shows the expression of EF1Bβ in xylem vessels (x) and interfascicular fibers (if).
We also investigated the expression pattern of the EF1Bβ gene in different tissues of WT Arabidopsis by qRT-PCR (primers listed in Table S1). EF1Bβ transcripts were detected in all of the tissues under study (Figure 3), but transcript abundance varied among the tissues. Relatively higher levels of EF1Bβ transcript were detected in root samples from seedlings and 6-week-old plants than in other tissues (P≤0.01) (Figure 3). This expression pattern is in accordance with data obtained using the EF1Bβ promoter::GUS fusion (Figure 2).
Data represent mean transcript abundance ± SD relative to EF1α and elF4A1 from three independent experiments each replicated three times. ** indicates significant difference relative to stem transcript level at P≤0.01.
Genetic analysis and complementation of the efβ mutant (SALK_046102C)
To dissect the role of EF1Bβ in cell wall formation, we initially confirmed the genetic basis and phenotype of efβ, a T-DNA insertion mutant of EF1Bβ (SALK_046102C). At the seedling stage, all the efβ plants grew normally and no visible phenotype differing from the WT phenotype was observed. However, a strong dwarf phenotype (Figure 4) developed later during rosette development and reproductive growth in some plants. To determine the nature of the mutation and T-DNA copy number, homozygous dwarf efβ was backcrossed (BC) to the WT (Col 0). All 35 BC F1 plants showed WT phenotype and the presence of T-DNA. Of 266 BC F2 plants, 200 plants showed a WT phenotype, whereas 66 plants showed a mutant phenotype. This result conforms to a theoretical segregation ratio of 3∶1, indicating a monogenic recessive mutation (P ≤ 0.01). We randomly selected 32 plants with WT phenotypes from the BC F2 population and used genomic DNA from segregating plants as template for PCR to determine the presence or absence of T-DNA. Of 32 plants, 21 plants had T-DNA insertion, whereas 11 plants did not contain T-DNA. This result supports a theoretical ratio of 2∶1 and also reflects a monogenic recessive mutation caused by T-DNA insertion at a single locus (P≤0.01).
Complemented mutant plant was transformed with a 35S::EF1Bβ cDNA.
To support the above evidence that disruption of EF1Bβ function by T-DNA insertion is responsible for its dwarf phenotype, we performed a complementation experiment, in which mutant efβ plants were transformed with an EF1Bβ over-expression construct EFβOX. We obtained five independent transformants (T1) with a restored (WT) phenotype (Figure 4). In addition, the expression of EF1Bβ in WT and efβ lines was measured in inflorescence stems from 6-week-old plants by qRT-PCR (primers listed in Table S1). In efβ, no expression of EF1Bβ was detected, whereas significant expression was detected in the WT (Figure 5A). These results confirm that efβ and its stunted phenotype are a direct result of T-DNA insertion into the EF1Bβ gene.
Data represent mean transcript abundance ± SD relative to EF1α and elF4A1 from three independent experiments each replicated three times. ** indicates significant difference at P ≤ 0.01.
Effect of EF1Bβ on cell wall structure
To investigate the consequences of altered EF1Bβ expression on cell wall structure, we over-expressed EF1Bβ in WT to develop an over-expression line (transformed with 35S::EF1Bβ, hereafter referred to as EFβOX) and used it in subsequent analysis along with efβ. The expression level of EF1Bβ in inflorescence stem as determined by qRT-PCR was 10-fold higher in EFβOX compared to WT (Figure 5B). For structural analysis, sections from the basal part of the inflorescence stem of 6-week-old plants of WT, EFβOX and efβ were histochemically stained with phloroglucinol, Mäule and Toluidine Blue reagents, and analyzed by light microscopy. Phloroglucinol stain reacts with coniferaldehyde groups in lignin, and the color intensity grossly reflects the total lignin content [29]. With phloroglucinol, efβ plants exhibited significantly shrunken interfascicular fibers, and smaller sized and a reduced number of xylem vessels, which suggested that overall lignin content was reduced in efβ compared to the WT and EFβOX lines (Figure 6A–C). Yellow-brown coloration from Mäule staining indicated that the xylary elements of all three types of lines were predominantly composed of G-lignin (Figure 6D–F). Red coloration (from Mäule staining) indicated that S-enriched lignin [29] was predominant in the interfascicular region of all three types of lines, and was also present in a patchy pattern within the vascular region of EFβOX (Figure 6F). However, the extent of the red coloration was somewhat lower in efβ due to the reduced interfascicular fibers (Figure 6D–F). In Toluidine Blue staining, some cells in between the cortex and phloem of the efβ stem showed unusual expanded cell shapes in addition to smaller and reduced xylem elements, and these unusual features were not found in either WT or EFβOX stems (Figure 6G–I). These histochemical observations indicated that disruption of EF1Bβ expression caused a reduction in total lignin content (mainly S-lignin) concurrently with growth reduction and a reduction in vascular elements and interfascicular fibers. They also showed that over-expression of EF1Bβ increases these elements and fibers in Arabidopsis (Figure 6C, F, I).
WT (A,D,G), efβ (B,E,H), and EFβOX (C,F,I) plants stained with either phloroglucinol (A–C), Mäule (D-F), or Toluidine Blue staining (G–I). In (H), arrow indicates unusual cell shape in efβ stem.
Effect of EF1Bβ on lignin content and composition
Changes in plant phenotype as well as structural and histochemical changes in the inflorescence stem of efβ prompted us to investigate the total lignin content in the inflorescence stems of WT, EFβOX and efβ plants by the thioglycolic acid method [21]. Total lignin content was reduced by 38% in inflorescence stems of efβ plants compared to the WT, whereas the lignin level was almost unaffected in EFβOX plants (Figure 7A). This result is consistent with lignin histochemical analysis (Figure 6).
Lignin is shown relative to that of the WT (A). Cellulose is expressed as µg cellulose mg−1 dry CWM (B). Data presented are means ± SD for three independent experiments, each replicated three times. * and ** indicate significant differences at P≤0.05 and 0.01, respectively.
Angiosperm lignin predominantly contains G and S subunits [10], [22]. Therefore, we determined the relative amounts of G and S monomers in the inflorescence stems by thioacidolysis [30]. This analysis showed that the S-lignin rather than G-lignin (and hence the S/G ratio) was significantly lower in efβ plants compared to WT, but no significant differences in S/G ratios could be detected between EFβOX and WT plants (Table 1).
Effect of EF1Bβ on cellulose content
Cellulose is the main component of cell wall and is indispensible for growth and development. Since disruption of EF1Bβ function resulted in a dwarf phenotype and affected lignin, modulation of EF1Bβ expression might also affect cellulose content. To investigate this possibility, we measured the cellulose fraction of cell wall from the inflorescence stem using a quantitative colorimetric assay [31]. We found no significant change in cellulose content in EFβOX, whereas efβ showed a 20% reduction in cellulose level relative to WT (Figure 7B). A significant reduction (20%) in cellulose level may reflect a general decrease in secondary wall thickening in efβ plants.
EF1Bβ over-expression affected cellulose biosynthesis genes
Because of the phenotypic and anatomical changes caused by altered EF1Bβ expression, we set out to evaluate the effect of EF1Bβ on the expression of select cell wall-related genes in inflorescence stems of 6-week-old plants of EFβOX and efβ lines. The transcript levels of 10 genes involved in the lignin biosynthetic pathway (listed in [32]) and LACCASE4 (LAC4) did not change significantly between the lines (Figure 8A, B). We also tested the expression pattern of one primary cell wall cellulose synthase gene CESA3 [33], three secondary cell wall genes CESA4, CESA7 and CESA8 [34], and a membrane-bound endoglucanase KORRIGAN1 (IRX2). Of all cellulose genes tested, only CESA3 and CESA7 showed significant differences in expression, but only in the EFBOX plants, where CESA3 and CESA7 expression was increased in relation to expression in efβ (Figure 8B).
Data presented as mean transcript abundance ± SD relative to EF1α and elF4A1of three independent experiments each replicated three times. * indicates significant difference relative to transcript levels in the efβ mutant at P≤0.05.
EF1Bβ rescues the eli1 phenotype and abolishes ectopic lignification
The eli1 mutant exhibits ectopic lignification and developmental abnormalities, including a stunted phenotype and disorganized xylem [15], due to a mutation in CESA3 [16]. In addition to cellulose biosynthesis, this gene plays a role in normal cell expansion [15]. By evaluating eli1 and several other dwarf mutants, these authors found a linkage between cell expansion, the initiation of secondary cell wall formation, and subsequent lignification. As our results suggested a role for EF1Bβ in plant growth and development, we investigated whether EF1Bβ had any role in the eli1 phenotype. When we expressed 35S::EF1Bβ in the eli1 background (hereafter referred to as eli1-EFβOX), transformants showed a restored growth phenotype similar to that of the WT (Figure 9A) indicating a role for EF1Bβ in rectifying the growth defects of eli1. We also determined the transcript levels of EF1Bβ in eli1-EFβOX and WT inflorescence stems to establish a link between eli1 phenotype rescue and EF1Bβ transcript level. The rescued plant showed an 11-fold higher expression of EF1Bβ relative to WT (Figure 9B). The higher expression of EF1Bβ in the restored plants supports the notion that EF1Bβ over-expression was responsible for the phenotypic complementation of eli1.
Phenotypes of Arabidopsis wild type, eli1 and EFβOX-complemented plants (A). Expression of EF1Bβ in WT and eli1-EFβOX inflorescence stems (B). Data presented as mean transcript abundance ± SD relative to EF1α and elF4A1 of three independent experiments and each replicated three times. ** indicates significant differences relative to WT transcript levels at P ≤ 0.01. Phloroglucinol staining of roots (C) and hypocotyls (D) from 5-day-old dark grown seedlings showing ectopic lignification in eli1 but not in eli1-EFBOX or in WT background. Cross sections of the base of the inflorescence stem of 6-week-old plants; WT (E,H), eli1 (F,I), and eli1-EFβOX (G,J) stained with phloroglucinol (E-G) and Toluidine Blue (H-J).
Five-day-old seedlings of WT, eli1 and eli1-EFβOX were used to compare lignin accumulation using phloroglucinol-HCl. Seedlings were grown in the dark without sucrose so they remained photosynthetically inactive and avoided any influence of external sugar on lignin [35]. This way the genetic makeup would predominantly contribute to lignin deposition. Under these conditions, phloroglucinol staining in the eli1 mutant showed patches of cells which accumulated ectopic lignin in both the root and hypocotyl, but were more concentrated in the root (Figure 9C, D). This result is consistent with previous studies on eli1 [15], [35], which showed strong ectopic lignin accumulation in the roots of seedlings grown in darkness. In contrast, no ectopic lignification was observed in the root or hypocotyl of either WT or eli1-EFβOX seedlings grown under the same conditions (Figure 9). These observations indicate that EF1Bβ over-expression abolished ectopic lignification in eli1 and restored the WT phenotype. Basal stem sections of eli1 showed moderately stained ectopic lignification in the pith parenchyma cells, while the intensity of staining in the xylem elements and interfascicular fibers of eli1 was relatively low (Figure 9F). Again, this lignin abnormality was absent from the eli1-EFβOX plants, showing a restored WT phenotype (Figure 9G).
Sections from the basal part of inflorescence stems were also stained with Toluidine Blue to observe cell structure. Sections of eli1 exhibited smaller cells with disrupted xylem vessel formation and abnormal development of cortex cells, tracheids, and some pith parenchyma cells (Figure 9I) as reported previously [15]. In contrast, sections from the rescued plant showed normal cell size and vascular development similar to that of the WT (Figure 9J). These observations established that EF1Bβ can complement the cell expansion defect of eli1 and ultimately abolish ectopic lignin accumulation in the eli1 mutant.
Expression profile of cell wall genes in eli1-EFβOX
In the above experiments we found that EF1Bβ over-expression in eli1 background restored the WT phenotype and abolished ectopic lignification in eli1 (Figure 9). To extend this analysis to the transcriptional level, we compared the expression pattern of phenylpropanoid and cellulose biosynthesis genes, namely PAL1, C4H, CCoAOMT1, F5H1, OMT1, CESA3, CESA4, CESA7 and CESA8, in the WT and eli1-EFβOX plants using 2-week-old seedlings grown on plates. Except for CESA3, no other gene including CESA7 showed statistically significant differences in expression in WT and eli1-EFβOX lines (Figure S2). CESA3 expression was almost two-fold higher in eli1-EFβOX relative to WT.
Discussion
Accumulating evidence indicates that components of the translational apparatus have functions in cells beyond their conventional role in protein synthesis [36]. In plants, cytoskeleton and cell wall biosynthetic activities now appear to be closely linked [11], [12], [37]. Due to this close relationship and the fact that EF1B is an actin-binding protein [13], we hypothesized that EF1Bβ may play a role in plant development and cell wall biosynthesis. To investigate this hypothesis, we used gain- and loss-of-function mutants of EF1Bβ in a detailed study using molecular, biochemical and histological approaches.
Through a localization study, we found that EF1Bβ is likely localized to the plasma membrane and cytosol. The plasma membrane localization is compatible with a role for EF1Bβ in the synthesis of cell wall components, such as cellulose. Cellulose synthesizing machineries are located in the plasma membrane [9], and two other plasma membrane bound proteins, KORRIGAN1 [38] and KOBITO1 [39], are involved in cellulose synthesis although they are not components of the cellulose synthase proteins. Recently, Gu et al. showed that cellulose synthase-interactive protein 1 (CSI1), a plasma membrane localized non-CESA protein is directly involved in cellulose synthesis in the primary cell wall through interaction with CESA isoforms [40]. These findings are in agreement with a possible role for EF1Bβ in cellulose biosynthesis.
EF1Bβ promoter::reporter gene expression analysis revealed EF1Bβ to be preferentially expressed in developing organs, and in developing fibers and vessels that undergo secondary wall synthesis. Relatively moderate-to-high levels of EF1Bβ transcript were detected in all tested organs, which indicate the ubiquitous expression of this gene and underscores the importance of EF1Bβ in plant growth and development. This expression pattern was corroborated when a dwarf phenotype was generated by the disruption of EF1Bβ expression (particularly in later stages of development), and is supported by the role EF1B plays in yeast growth [3]. Recently Vain et al. reported that a homozygous T-DNA insertion mutant of the gene encoding eukaryotic translation initiation factor 4A (elF4A) in Brachypodium distachyon exhibited a dwarf phenotype (43-46% of the height of the plant without T-DNA insertion) due to a decrease in both cell number and cell size, and the plants were completely sterile [41]. Both elF4A and EF1Bβ are involved in translation, and silencing of the two genes resulted in dwarf phenotypes though efβ plants were fully fertile. A stunted growth phenotype was observed in plants with disrupted expression of different genes involved in cellulose and lignin biosynthesis [9], [10], [16]. Arabidopsis irregular xylem 1, 3, and 5 mutants which correspond to mutations in CESA8, CESA7, and CESA4 are characterized by collapsed xylem vessels and stems with ∼ 70% lower levels of cellulose compared to wild-type plants [42]-[44]. Our results revealed that disruption of EF1Bβ also caused significant reductions in lignin and cellulose levels in cell walls and a change in vascular morphology and structure of the inflorescence stem of the efβ mutant. As with the Aspen PttCel9A1 homolog of KORRIGAN1 [45], the gain-of-function EFβOX plants showed cellulose and lignin contents similar to WT. Reduction of cell size and changes in cell shape due to disruption of cellulose gene was also observed in the eli1 mutant and was restored to the WT phenotype in the eli1-EFβOX plants.
The reduced cellulose and stunted phenotype with changed cell shape in efβ are consistent with reduced growth and misshapen cells found in mutants affecting other plasma membrane-associated proteins, including cellulose biosynthesis and related genes such as CESA3 [15], KORRIGAN1 [38] and KOBITO1 [39], and suggest that EF1Bβ may be involved in cellulose biosynthesis. Vascular tissues, either primary or secondary, of higher plants play essential roles in the transport of water, nutrients, and signaling molecules and in physical support [46]. So, the alteration in the size and shape of the vessel elements in efβ could impact the transport of nutrients and water to the stem, which could contribute to the reduced stem size of the mutant plants. Disruption of lignin regulatory genes, such as MYB58 and MYB63 [47], and lignin structural genes, such as hydroxycinnamyl alcohol dehydrogenase (CAD) [48], [49] and hydroxycinnamoyl CoA reductase (CCR) also resulted in a wide range of developmental defects, including dwarfism, reduction of cell wall thickness, deformed cell shape, and sterility. EF1Bβ is a plasma membrane and cytosolic protein whereas phenylpropanoid enzymes tend to be cytoplasmic or ER localized [10]. Considering the involvement of this EF1Bβ in translational elongation, a direct role for this protein in lignin biosynthesis is unlikely, but rather its role in lignin biosynthesis may be through maintaining normal plant development.
Lignin monomer composition, when expressed as the syringyl/guaiacyl (S/G) ratio, was altered due to down-regulation of the EF1Bβ gene in efβ plants relative to WT and EFβOX plants. S-rich lignins are predominantly deposited in the interfasicular fibers of Arabidopsis, whereas cell walls of xylem vessels are rich in guaiacyl lignin [35]. The reduced interfascicular fiber region of efβ may have resulted in/from lower S-lignin and a lower S/G ratio in the inflorescence stem of efβ relative to WT and EFβOX plants. Recently, Berthet et al. demonstrated a strong reduction in lignin content with a substantial increase in S/G ratio in an Arabidopsis laccase double mutant (lac4-2lac17) with higher saccharification efficiency [29]. In contrast, Sonbol et al. reported a positive relationship between lower S/G ratio and increased availability of cell wall polysaccharides in Arabidopsis [50], while Srinivasa Reddy et al. demonstrated in alfalfa that the S/G ratio is not necessarily related to cell wall digestibility [51]. These apparent contradictions underline the importance of additional research with EF1Bβ to elucidate the relation between lignin composition and cell wall digestibility and to determine its potential use as a tool to engineer plant cell walls for higher digestibility.
Stunted growth and reductions in cellulose and lignin contents in efβ plants led us to investigate the effects of modulating EF1Bβ transcript levels on the expression of select lignin and cellulose biosynthesis genes. However, no significant differences were observed in levels of transcripts of lignin biosynthesis or cellulose synthase genes except for CESA3 and CESA7 in either EFβOX or efβ relative to the WT. Histochemical analysis revealed increased vascular development in the EFβOX plants which might be related to the upregulation of CESA3 or CESA7 transcript levels. Recently Hématy et al. reported that a functional THESEUS1 (THE1), a plasma-membrane-bound receptor-like kinase gene, was required for the dwarf phenotype and ectopic-lignin accumulation in greenhouse-grown cellulose-deficient mutants eli1-1, rsw1-10, and pom1-2, but this gene also did not up-regulate any of the monolignol biosynthetic genes [20]. Since EF1Bβ is involved in translation elongation, it is likely that this gene predominantly affects cellulose or lignin biosynthesis at the posttranscriptional level or regulates both of these processes in some indirect fashion.
The inhibition of cellulose synthesis triggers a set of characteristic cellular changes and altered transcript levels for hundreds of genes [20]. The ectopic lignification mutant eli1 has been extensively studied to elucidate the role of the CESA3 gene in cellulose biosynthesis, cell expansion, and plant morphology and lignin deposition [16]. We over-expressed EF1Bβ in the eli1 background, which successfully abolished ectopic lignifications and restored the WT phenotype. CESA3 is a cell expansion protein and is important for plant development [15], [16]. Phenotypic and functional rescue of eli1 by EF1Bβ is consistent with a role for this protein in cell expansion. Gene expression patterns of selected cell wall-related genes in WT and eli1-EFβOX were unaltered except for CESA3 which also reflected the reversal of eli1 characteristics by EF1Bβ. However, upregulation of the CESA3 transcript level in eli1-EFβOX might be related to the elevation of EF1Bβ transcript levels, although the mechanism is unknown. Both genes are involved in cell elongation and it is possible that this common role is responsible for this elevation. Varying degrees of ectopic lignification occur in eli1 [15], rsw1 [52], korrigan1 [53], and det3 [54], and the degree of ectopic lignification was correlated with the degree of cell expansion. However, we did not observe any ectopic lignification in efβ (data not shown). As with the Arabidopsis mutants, pom-pom and cobra, this implies that reduced cell expansion does not necessarily lead to ectopic lignin accumulation [15], [55] and strongly suggests the involvement of other (or indirect) mechanism(s) or feedback affecting the synthesis of other cell wall components. For example, fluorescent live-cell imaging of CESA6 [56] and CESA3 [57] identified significant intracellular Golgi reservoirs of CESA proteins which did not exclusively coincide with cellulose synthase complex (CSC) assembly. Golgi bodies are known to “pause” on microtubules and affect the excretion of CSCs in Arabidopsis [37]. Hence, intracellular trafficking of CESAs could play a role in the developmental and environmental regulation of cell wall composition. In addition, Caño-Delgado et al. showed that reduced cellulose synthesis rather than lignification was responsible for reduced growth of and ectopic lignification in the eli1 mutant [16]. Indirect effects would explain the role of EF1Bβ in lignin biosynthesis as a consequence of the disruption of cellulose biosynthesis.
In conclusion, EF1Bβ is a novel regulator of plant development and plays an important role in cell wall formation. Disruption of its expression negatively impacts plant growth and development as well as vascular tissue development. Over-expression of this gene rescued the cell expansion defects of eli1 mutant, which further confirms an important role for EF1Bβ in plant development. However, EF1Bβ should be studied in more detail to further unravel the mechanism of cell wall biosynthesis and to confirm whether efβ is hypostatic or epistatic relative to eli1.
Supporting Information
Figure S1.
Confocal images showing localization of EF1Bβ-YFP (A and D) in Arabidopsis root tip cells plasmolyzed with 0.75 M sorbitol. SynaptoRed (SR) was used as a plasma membrane marker (B and E). Panels C and F are the merged images of the YFP and SR channels. Panels A and C are showing bright yellow circular bodies, possibly the accumulation of EF1Bβ-YFP proteins. Lower panels (D-F) show a close-up of root tip cells. Bars = 10 µm.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0030425.s001
(TIF)
Figure S2.
Expression of select cell wall-related genes in WT and eli1-EFβOX. Data presented as mean transcript abundance ± SD relative to EF1α and elF4A1 of three independent experiments and each replicated three times. * indicates significant differences relative to WT transcript levels at P ≤ 0.05.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0030425.s002
(TIF)
Table S1.
List of primers used in this study.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0030425.s003
(DOC)
Acknowledgments
ZH and JJ were recipients of Visiting Fellowships in Canadian Government Laboratories. The eli1 seeds were a gift from Dr. Dario Bonetta, University of Ontario Institute of Technology. Vector pBINPLUS was a gift from Dr. Bettina Hause, Institute of Plant Biochemistry, Germany. We thank Alex Molnar for helping with the figures.
Author Contributions
Conceived and designed the experiments: AH MG ZH. Performed the experiments: ZH LA BM JJ. Analyzed the data: AH MG ZH LA BM JJ. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: BM LA JJ. Wrote the paper: ZH LA AH MG.
References
- 1.
Mathews MB, Sonenberg N, Hershey JWB (2000) Origins and principles of translational control. In: Sonenberg N, Hershey J, Mathews M, editors. Translational Control of Gene Expression. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press. pp. 1–31.
- 2.
Merrick WC, Nyborg J (2000) The protein synthesis elongation cycle. In: Sonenberg N, Hershey J, Mathews M, editors. Translational Control of Gene Expression. Cold Spring Harbor, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press. pp. 89–126.
- 3. Hiraga K, Suzuki K, Tsuchiya E, Miyakawa T (1993) Cloning and characterization of the elongation factor EF-1β homologue of Saccharomyces cerevisiae; EF-1β is essential for growth. FEBS Lett 316: 165–169.
- 4. Olarewaju O, Ortiz PA, Chowdhury WQ, Chatterjee I, Kinzy TG (2004) The translation elongation factor eEF1B plays a role in the oxidative stress response pathway. RNA Biol 1: 89–94.
- 5. Pittman YR, Kandl K, Lewis M, Valente L, Kinzy TG (2009) Coordination of eukaryotic translation elongation factor 1A (eEF1A) function in actin organization and translation elongation by the guanine nucleotide exchange factor eEF1Bα. J Biol Chem 284: 4739–4747.
- 6. Le Sourd F, Boulben S, Le Bouffant R, Cormier P, Morales J, et al. (2006) eEF1B: At the dawn of the 21st century. Biochim Biophys Acta 1759: 13–31.
- 7. Somerville C, Bauer S, Brininstool G, Facette M, Hamann T, et al. (2004) Toward a systems approach to understanding plant cell walls. Science 306: 2206–2211.
- 8.
Carpita NC, McCann M (2000) The cell wall. In: Rockville MD, Buchanan B, Gruissem W, Jones RL, editors. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology of Plants. American Society of Plant Physiologists. pp. 52–108.
- 9. Somerville C (2006) Cellulose synthesis in higher plants. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 22: 53–78.
- 10. Bonawitz ND, Chapple C (2010) The genetics of lignin biosynthesis: connecting genotype to phenotype. Annu Rev Genet 44: 337–363.
- 11. Wightman R, Turner SR (2008) The roles of the cytoskeleton during cellulose deposition at the secondary cell wall. Plant J 54: 794–805.
- 12. Fujita M, Himmelspach R, Hocart CH, Williamson RE, Mansfield SD, et al. (2011) Cortical microtubules optimize cell-wall crystallinity to drive unidirectional growth in Arabidopsis. Plant J 66: 915–928.
- 13. Furukawa R, Jinks TM, Tishgarten T, Mazzawi M, Morris DR, et al. (2001) Elongation factor 1β is an actin-binding protein. Biochim Biophys Acta 1527: 130–140.
- 14. Alonso JM, Stepanova AN, Leisse TJ, Kim CJ, Chen H, et al. (2003) Genome-wide insertional mutagenesis of Arabidopsis thaliana. Science 301: 653–657.
- 15. Caño-Delgado A, Metzlaff K, Bevan MW (2000) The eli1 mutation reveals a link between cell expansion and secondary cell wall formation in Arabidopsis thaliana. Development 127: 3395–3405.
- 16. Caño-Delgado A, Penfield S, Smith C, Catley M, Bevan MW (2003) Reduced cellulose synthesis invokes lignification and defense responses in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant J 34: 351–362.
- 17. Curtis MD, Grossniklaus U (2003) A Gateway cloning vector set for high-throughput functional analysis of genes in planta. Plant Physiol 133: 462–469.
- 18. Earley KW, Haag JR, Pontes O, Opper K, Juehne T, et al. (2006) Gateway-compatible vectors for plant functional genomics and proteomics. Plant J 45: 616–629.
- 19. Clough SJ, Bent AF (1998) Floral dip: a simplified method for Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant J 16: 735–743.
- 20. Hématy K, Sado PE, Tuinen AV, Rochange S, Desnos T, et al. (2007) A receptor-like kinase mediates the response of Arabidopsis cells to the inhibition of cellulose synthesis. Curr Biol 17: 922–931.
- 21. Brinkmann K, Blaschke L, Polle A (2002) Comparison of different methods for lignin determination as a basis for calibration of near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy and implications of lignoproteins. J Chem Ecol 28: 2483–2501.
- 22. Foster CE, Martin TM, Pauly M (2010) Comprehensive compositional analysis of plant cell walls (lignocellulosic biomass) Part I: Lignin. JoVE. 37. Journal of Visualized Experiments. Available: http://www.jove.com/index/Details.stp?ID=1745 (doi: 10.3791/1745). Accessed 2011 Dec 22.
- 23. Schrick K, Fujioka S, Takatsuto S, Stierhof YD, Stransky H, et al. (2004) A link between sterol biosynthesis, the cell wall, and cellulose in Arabidopsis. Plant J 38: 227–243.
- 24. Vandesompele J, De Preter K, Pattyn F, Poppe B, Van Roy N, et al. (2002) Accurate normalization of real-time quantitative RT-PCR data by geometric averaging of multiple internal control genes. Genome Biol 3: Available: http://genomebiology.com/2002/3/7/research/0034. Accessed 2011 Mar 01.
- 25. Ramakers C, Ruijter JM, Deprez RH, Moorman AF (2003) Assumption-free analysis of quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) data. NeuroSci Lett 339: 62–66.
- 26. Benschop JJ, Mohammed S, O'laherty M, Heck AJR, Slijper M, et al. (2007) Quantitative phospho-proteomics of early elicitor signaling in Arabidopsis. Mol Cell Proteomics 6: 1198–1214.
- 27. Mitra SK, Walters BT, Clouse SD (2009) An efficient organic solvent based extraction method for the proteomic analysis of Arabidopsis plasma membranes. J Proteome Res 8: 2752–2767.
- 28. Ito J, Batth TS, Petzold CJ, Redding-Johanson AM, Mukhopadhyay A, et al. (2010) Analysis of the Arabidopsis cytosolic proteome highlights subcellular partitioning of central plant metabolism. J Proteome Res 10: 1571–1582.
- 29. Berthet S, Demont-Caulet N, Pollet B, Bidzinski P, Cézard L, et al. (2011) Disruption of LACCASE4 and 17 results in tissue-specific alterations to lignification of Arabidopsis thaliana stems. Plant Cell 23: 1124–1137.
- 30. Lapierre C, Monties B, Rolando C (1985) Thioacidolysis of lignin: Comparison with acidolysis. J Wood Chem Technol 5: 277–292.
- 31. Updegraff DM (1969) Semimicro determination of cellulose in biological materials. Anal Biochem 32: 420–424.
- 32. Raes J, Rohde A, Christensen JH, Van de Peer Y, Boerjan W (2003) Genome-wide characterization of the lignification toolbox in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol 133: 1051–1071.
- 33. Burn JE, Hocart CH, Birch RJ, Cork AC, Williamson RE (2002) Functional analysis of the cellulose synthase genes CesA1, CesA2, and CesA3 in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol 129: 797–807.
- 34. Taylor NG, Gardiner JC, Whiteman R, Turner SR (2004) Cellulose synthesis in the Arabidopsis secondary cell wall. Cellulose 11: 329–338.
- 35. Rogers LA, Dubos C, Surman C, Willment J, Cullis IF, et al. (2005) Comparison of lignin deposition in three ectopic lignification mutants. New Phytol 168: 123–140.
- 36. Gross SR, Kinzy TG (2005) Translation elongation factor 1 A is essential for regulation of the actin cytoskeleton and cell morphology. Nat Struct Mol Biol 12: 772–778.
- 37. Crowell EF, Bischoff V, Desprez T, Rolland A, Stierhof Y-D, et al. (2009) Pausing of golgi bodies on microtubules regulates secretion of cellulose synthase complexes in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 21: 1141–1154.
- 38. Sato S, Kato T, Kakegawa K, Ishii , T , Liu Y-G, et al. (2001) Role of the putative membrane-bound endo-1,4-glucanase KORRIGAN in cell elongation and cellulose synthesis in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Cell Physiol 42: 251–263.
- 39. Pagant S, Bichet A, Sugimoto K, Lerouxel O, Desprez T, et al. (2002) KOBITO1 encodes a novel plasma membrane protein necessary for normal synthesis of cellulose during cell expansion in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 14: 2001–2013.
- 40. Gu Y, Kaplinsky N, Bringmann M, Cobb A, Carroll A, et al. (2010) Identification of a cellulose synthase-associated protein required for cellulose biosynthesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107: 12866–12871.
- 41. Vain P, Thole V, Worland B, Opanowicz M, Bush MS, et al. (2011) A T-DNA mutation in the RNA helicase eIF4A confers a dose-dependent dwarfing phenotype in Brachypodium distachyon. Plant J 66: 929–940.
- 42. Turner SR, Somerville CR (1997) Collapsed xylem phenotype of Arabidopsis identifies mutants deficient in cellulose deposition in the secondary cell wall. Plant Cell 9: 689–701.
- 43. Taylor NG, Laurie S, Turner SR (2000) Multiple cellulose synthase catalytic subunits are required for cellulose synthesis in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 12: 2529–2539.
- 44. Taylor NG, Howells RM, Huttly AK, Vickers K, Turner SR (2003) Interactions among three distinct CesA proteins essential for cellulose synthesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100: 1450–1455.
- 45. Takahashi J, Rudsande UJ, Hedenström M, Banasiak A, Harholt J, et al. (2009) KORRIGAN1 and its Aspen homolog PttCel9A1 decrease cellulose crystallinity in Arabidopsis stems. Plant Cell Physiol 50: 1099–1115.
- 46. Scarpella E, Meijer AH (2004) Pattern formation in the vascular system of monocot and dicot plant species. New Phytol 164: 209–242.
- 47. Zhou J, Lee C, Zhong R, Ye ZH (2009) MYB58 and MYB63 are transcriptional activators of the lignin biosynthetic pathway during secondary cell wall formation in Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 21: 248–266.
- 48. Sibout R, Eudes A, Mouille G, Pollet B, Lapierre C, et al. (2005) CINNAMYL ALCOHOL DEHYDROGENASE-C and -D are the primary genes involved in lignin biosynthesis in the floral stem of Arabidopsis. Plant Cell 17: 2059–2076.
- 49. Thévenin J, Pollet B, Letarnec B, Saulnier L, Gissot L, et al. (2011) The simultaneous repression of CCR and CAD, two enzymes of the lignin biosynthetic pathway, results in sterility and dwarfism in Arabidopsis thaliana. Mol Plant 4: 70–82.
- 50. Sonbol FM, Fornalé S, Capellades M, Encina A, Touriño S, et al. (2009) The maize ZmMYB42 represses the phenylpropanoid pathway and affects the cell wall structure, composition and degradability in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Mol Biol 70: 283–296.
- 51. Srinivasa Reddy MS, Chen F, Shadle G, Jackson L, Aljoe H, et al. (2005) Targeted down-regulation of cytochrome P450 enzymes for forage quality improvement in alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.). Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102: 16573–16578.
- 52. Arioli T, Peng L, Betzner AS, Burn J, Wittke W, et al. (1998) Molecular analysis of cellulose biosynthesis in Arabidopsis. Science 279: 717–720.
- 53. Szyjanowicz PM, McKinnon I, Taylor NG, Gardiner J, Jarvis MC, et al. (2004) The irregular xylem 2 mutant is an allele of korrigan that affects the secondary cell wall of Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant J 37: 730–740.
- 54. Schumacher K, Vafeados D, McCarthy M, Sze H, Wilkins T, et al. (1999) The Arabidopsis det3 mutant reveals a central role for the vacuolar H+-ATPase in plant growth and development. Genes Dev 13: 3259–3270.
- 55. Hauser MT, Morikami A, Benfey PN (1995) Conditional root expansion mutants of Arabidopsis. Development 121: 1237–1252.
- 56. Paredez A, Somerville CR, Ehrhardt D (2006) Dynamic visualization of cellulose synthase demonstrates functional association with cortical microtubules. Science 312: 1491–1495.
- 57. Desprez T, Juraniec M, Crowell EF, Jouy H, Pochylova Z, et al. (2007) Organization of cellulose synthase complexes involved in primary cell wall synthesis in Arabidopsis thaliana. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104: 15572–15577.