tmp684 TMP
tmp684 TMP
The Royal Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philosophical
Transactions: Biological Sciences.
[Link]
SUMMARY
A major change in the development of plants occurs upon floral induction. Meristems in certain
positions become organized to [Link] are studyingthisprocess using a combination of genetic,
In particular, we are exploiting transposonmolecular and physiological approaches in Antirrhinum.
induced mutations in genes controlling early switches in floral development. These mutations cause
homeotic and heterochronicphenotypes and three categories of genes have been identified. The first
to a floralstate. This gene has
includesfloricaula(lo), which is required to switchinflorescencemeristenms
been isolated and shown to be expressed transientlyin bract, sepal, petal and carpel primordia. The
second group of genes controls the identity (and sometimes the number) of organs in a whorl. These
genes affectoverlapping whorls and their mutant phenotypes suggest a combinatorial model for gene
action in determining the fate of floral primordia. Some of the regulatory interactions between these
genes have been revealed by studyingcis- or trans-actingmutations which have resulted in ectopic gene
[Link] of the thirdcategorydeterminethe identityof organs within one whorl and thus affect
the symmetryof the [Link] propose that the interactionsof these homeotic genes control the basic
but also in a diverse range of
patterns of inflorescenceand flowerdevelopment not only in Antirrhinum,
plant species.
1. INTRODUCTION
Plants develop by the sequential addition of structures
to the main body. These structures originate from
lateral meristemsinitiated on the flanks of the main
apical meristem. The apical meristem is an undifferentiated tissue and throughout developrnent it
integratessignals to determine the identityand positioning of these lateral meristems. Typically, plants
initially undergo a vegetative phase of development
whereby leaves and shoots originate from these meristems. At a later stage, floral induction may occur
whereby these lateral meristemsare induced to form
completely differentstructures,flowers rather than
leafy shoots.
A number of genes affectingthe identity of these
differentineristemshave now been isolated from a
variety of plant species (Coen & Meyerowitz 1991).
Our own study focuses on three classes of gene in
that upon mutation give homeotic and, in
Antirrhinum
some cases, heterochronic phenotypes. These genes
can affect the switch in the type of meristernsproduced, the identity of primordia arising in floral
meristems, or the switching of a meristermfrom
indeterminate to determinate growth.
majushas many genetical and physioloAntirrhinum
gical attributes that make it amenable to study: its
large flowers are easily emasculated, crossed and
scored, the differentphases of vegetative and reproductive development are easily seen and can be
Mhil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B (1993) 339, 193-197
P'rintedin GreatBritain
OF WILD-TYPE PLANT
AND MUTAGENESIS
193
[ 55 ]
194
offlowering
Generegulation
this transitionmightbe expected to produce proliferating inflorescence shoots in place of flowers. One
mutant obtained with this phenotype is floricaula(flo)
0 8_
Inflorescence
(Carpenter & Coen 1990). The flo mutant initiates
flowers
vegetative growth and the transitionto inflorescence
4-'o
bracts
Ca1
meristemin a similar manner to wild-type. However,
instead of flowers being produced in the axils of
bracts,indeterminateshoots bearing furtherbracts are
leaves
produced, each shoot having two opposite bracts at
the base followed by a spiral of single bracts (figure2).
stem
_~
Each of these shoots in turn produces furthershoots in
the axils of their bracts and this sequence is perpetuated. The wild-typeflo product is thereforenecessary forthe transitionbetween inflorescenceand floral
meristems so that in its absence the inflorescence
(b)
(c)
programme is continually reiterated. The flo mutant
~ stem axis
*
can be considered to be homeotic because it resultsin
B
aborted stamen
one structure(the flower) being replaced by a homologous structure (indeterminate shoot). This mutant
0
X
~~~stamenS
(
can also be viewed as heterochronic (changing the
relative timingof events) because it resultsin an early
2
petals
developmental programme (inflorescence meristem)
~---sepasI1
bract
being continually reiterated.
majus. (a) Schematic
Figure 1. Floweringin Antirrhinum
Other mutants have been described in Antirrhinum,
of wild-typeAntirrhinum
majusdevelopment.(b)
illustration
such as squamosa, which produce inflorescence-like
Floral diagram showingsepal, petal, stamen and carpel
shoots in the axils of bracts, although many of these
organsarrangedin fourconsecutivewhorlsin the axil of a
shoots eventually produce flowers (Stubbe 1966;
bract. (c) Schematicdrawingof the fourwhorls(1-4) and
Huijser et al. 1992). Interestingly,although plants
threeregions(A, B and C) of a flower.
with stable fioricaulaalleles never produce flowers,
under certain conditions the inflorescence meristem
may eventually terminatein carpel-like structures.A
similar mutant, leafy,has been found in Arabidopsis
outermostand whorl 4 is central (figure1). The whorl
(Haughn & Sommerville 1988; Wiegel et al. 1992).
primordia appear sequentially: whorl 1 first,2 and 3
A second class of mutant has almost the opposite
almost simultaneously and finally whorl 4 (Awasthi
effectof those described above because it promotes the
etal. 1984). Organs within a whorl are upper, ifcloser
conversion of inflorescence to floral meristems in
to the stem (adaxial), or lower if nearer the bract
positions where this would not normally occur. Plants
(abaxial). Whorl 1 consistsof five sepals and whorl 2,
with indeterminateinflorescences,such as Antirrhinum,
the corolla, contains five petals which are fused for
do not produce terminal flowers. Thus, the apical
part of theirlength, but end in five separate lobes. In
inflorescence meristem does not itself undergo the
whorl 3, five stamen primordia are initiated, though
mutant in Antirtransitionto floral. The centroradialis
the uppermost fails to develop fully. Whorl 4 is
rlihnum
produces terminal flowers,suggestingthat the
occupied by two united carpels forminga gynoecium
with a bilocular ovary (figure lb).
wild-typegene product inhibits this apical conversion
To isolate and study homeotic genes in Antirrhinum (Kuckuck & Schick 1930).
has been isolated and
The flo gene of Antirrhinum
we have carried out an extensive transposon mutageextensivelycharacterized (Coen et al. 1990). It pronesis experiment (Carpenter & Coen 1990). Plants
duces a transcript of about 1.6 kb which has the
carrying active transposons were grown at 15?C, a
temperature inducing transposition in Antirrhinum potential to encode a protein whose sequence shows
no extensive homologies with any other proteins in
(Carpenter et al. 1987), and self-pollinated to give
available data-banks, though it contains some motifIs
26 000 progeny,many of which were expected to carry
found in [Link] suggeststhat FLO
recessive mutations in a heterozygous condition. The
homozygous phenotypeswere revealed by self-pollinamay be a transcriptional activator, although other
tion and growing 80000 plants. Over 15 independent
roles cannot be excluded. RNA analysis reveals that
homeotic mutations were obtained from this screen
flo is induced within two days when plants are shifted
and here we present our conclusions derived from a
to daylength conditions that promote [Link] situ
hybridization shows thatflo is expressed from a very
study of some of the genes involved.
early stage in wild-type inflorescences in a very
temporal and spatial sequence. The earliest
specific
OF THE FIRST STEPS
CONTROL
3. GENETIC
expression seen is in bract primordia and is followed
DEVELOPMENT
IN FLORAL
by expressionin sepal, petal and carpel primordia,but
The transitionfrom inflorescenceto floral meristems
no expressionis seen in stamen primordia. Expression
representsthe firststep specific to the floral developin each organ is transientand is not observed in later
mental pathway. Mutants that are unable to carryout
stages of development. Taken together, these results
(a)
apical meristem
[ 56
186
Regulationof humanglobingeneswitching
9.5 d
N
~~~
04
_
-~
Hy
"
/t
st
HPFH99
T} n_
GENES
13.5 d
Ce)
OF THE GLOBIN
MICE
so
xo
-o
HPFH61
-s
4
*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~o
Figure 3. SI nuclease mapping analysis of minilocus wild-type yrand Greek HPFH y3 mice during development.
RNA was prepared fromtransgenic9.5 day yolk sacs, 13.5 day foetal lixers and fromblood of adult mice. Tlhe yolk
sacs and foetal livers containing minilocus wty- wNere
analysed directl) aftermicroinjectionwhereas yolk sac, foetal
liver and adult blood containing the Greek HPFH yS constructwere obtained by breeding lines 61 and 99. Control
RNAs were fromK562 and Hul l cells. T he signals for humainy- and S-globin RNA are indicated on the left (Hy.
Hr).
[ 48 1
196
of flowerina
Gene renigulalion
CONTROL
OF WHORL
NUMBER
[ 58
EVOLUTION
REFERENCES
Awasthi, D.K., Kumar, V. & Murty, Y.S. 1984 Flower
development in Antirrhinum
majus L.(Scrophulariaceae)with
a comment upon corolla tube [Link]. Mag. Tokyo
97, 13-22.
Bowman, J.L., Smyth, D.R. & Meyerowitz, E.M. 1989
Genes directingflowerdevelopment in [Link]. Cell
1, 37-52.
Carpenter, R. & Coen E.S.
1990 Floral homeotic
Generegulation
offlowering D. Bradley and others 197
mutations produced by transposon-mutagenesisin Antirrhinummajus. GenesDev. 4, 1483-1493.
Carpenter. R., Martin, C.R. & Coen, E.S. 1987 Comparison of genetic behaviour of the transposable element
ITam3 at two unlinked pigment loci in Antirrhinum
majus.
Molec. Gen. Genet.207, 82-89.
Coen, E.S., Romero, J.M., Doyle, S., Elliott, R., Murphy,
G. & Carpenter, R. 1990 floricaula: a homeotic gene
required for flowerdevelopment in Antirrhinum
majus. Cell
63, 1311--1322.
Coen, E.S. & Meyerowitz, E.M. 1991 The war of the
whorls: genetic interactions controlling flower development. Nature,Lond. 353, 31-37.
Drews, G.N., Bowman, J.L. & Meyerowitz, E.M. 1991
Negative regulation of the Arabidopsis homeotic gene
agamousby the apetala-2 product. Cell 65, 991-1002.
Haughn, G.W. & Sommerville, C.R. 1988 Genetic control
of morphogenesis in [Link] Genet.9, 73-89.
Heslop-Harrison, J. 1964 Sex expression in flowering
plants. Brookhaven
[Link]. 16, 109-125.
Huijser, P., Klein, J., Lonnig, W.-E., Meijer, H., Saedler,
H. & Sommer, H. 1992 Bracteomania,an inflorescence
[ 59
anomoly, is caused by the loss of function of the MADSbox gene squamosa in Antirrhinum
majus. EMBO J. 11,
1239-1249.
Ingham, P.W. 1988 The molecular genetics of embryonic
pattern formationin [Link],Lond. 335, 25-34.
Kuckuck, H. & Schick, R. 1930 Die Erbfaktoren bei
Antirrhinummajus und ihre Bezeichnung. Z. indukt.
Abstamm.u. VererbLehre.
56, 51-83.
Peyritsch, J. 1872 Uber Pelorienbildungen. Sber. Akad.
Wiss. Wien. 66, 1-35.
Schwarz-Sommer, Z., Huijser, P., Nacken, W., Saedler, H.
& Sommer, H. 1990 Genetic control of flower development: homeotic genes in Antirrhinum
majus. Science,Wash.
250, 931-936.
Sommer, H., Beltran,J., Huijser, P., Pape, H., Lonnig, W.,
Saedler, H. & Schwarz-Sommer, Z. 1990 Deficiens,a
homeotic gene involved in the control of flower morphogenesis in Antirrhinum
majus: the protein shows homology
to transcriptionfactors. EMBO J. 9, 605-613.
L. sect
Stubbe, H. 1966 GenetikundZytologievonAntirrhinum
Antirrhinum.
VEB. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Jena.
Studying transposable elements in Antirrhinum majus reveals their impact on gene expression regulation, particularly through generating mutations. Transposon mutagenesis allows identification of critical genes involved in floral development by inserting into different genomic regions, affecting gene activity. These elements not only facilitate the study of genetic control within flowers but also demonstrate evolutionary processes through genetic variability and adaptability .
Mutations such as floricaula and centroradialis reveal complexities in plant development by altering conventional growth pathways. Floricaula mutants continually produce indeterminate shoots instead of flowers, illustrating the gene’s role in switching developmental programs from inflorescence to floral meristems. Centroradialis mutations, producing terminal instead of lateral flowers, suggest alternative pathways in inflorescence architecture, highlighting genetic control in spatial and temporal meristem identity .
Evidence from transgenic mice indicates that the LCR influences stage-specific expression of globin genes. Without LCR, the ε gene remains inactive, while γ and β genes show developmental regulation. When linked to LCR, the ε gene expresses only in embryonic stages, supporting LCR’s role in modulating expression patterns based on developmental stages. This regulatory mechanism also involves stage-specific suppressors and gen competition for LCR interaction .
The FLO gene in Antirrhinum majus is crucial for the transition from inflorescence to floral meristems. In the flo mutant, this transition does not occur, leading to the production of indeterminate shoots bearing further bracts instead of flowers. The FLO gene is thus necessary to cease the inflorescence programme and initiate floral development, suggesting it may act as a transcriptional activator specific to this transition .
Antirrhinum majus flowers are zygomorphic, meaning they can be divided into mirror-image halves by a single plane. The flowers consist of four whorls of organs; whorl 1 has five sepals, whorl 2 contains five petals, whorl 3 begins with five stamen primordia, and whorl 4 includes two united carpels forming a gynoecium. This arrangement contributes to the flower's symmetry, influenced by the spatial distribution and development sequences within the meristem .
In plant development, structures are added sequentially to the main body from lateral meristems initiated on the flanks of the undifferentiated apical meristem. In Antirrhinum majus, this begins with a vegetative phase producing leaves and shoots. The apical meristem then transitions to forming floral structures when induced. This sequential development is crucial for organizing different organ types at specific life stages, demonstrating the intricate regulatory mechanisms in plant growth .
Homeotic genes in Antirrhinum majus determine the identity of floral organs within specific whorls, affecting the symmetry and structure of the flower. Mutations in these genes can result in ectopic expression or transform one organ type into another, altering the floral pattern and demonstrating how specific genes control organ specification and overall floral architecture .
The polar-coordinate model for zygomorphy in Antirrhinum majus posits that floral symmetry arises from differential gene activity along the floral axis, influenced by environmental asymmetries. This model is useful for explaining how gradient effects, such as those from cyc activity, generate distinctive floral features like asymmetry in lateral meristems while explaining radial symmetry in terminal flowers. Such models provide insights into the spatial genetic control of floral morphogenesis .
Transposon mutagenesis experiments in Antirrhinum majus have allowed for the isolation and study of homeotic genes critical for floral development. These experiments induced mutations by growing plants at temperatures that activate transposons, revealing recessive mutations when self-pollinated. Over 15 independent homeotic mutations were obtained, shedding light on genetic control mechanisms such as the transition from inflorescence to floral meristems .
The centroradialis mutation in Antirrhinum majus causes the production of terminal flowers with radial symmetry instead of the typical indeterminate inflorescences. This gene mutation affects the apical inflorescence's ability to produce lateral flowers, resulting in radial symmetry because the terminal flower is in a radially symmetric environment, unlike lateral meristems in their asymmetric one .