llm-domain containing b-gata factors control different ... · 74 b-gatas (richter et al., 2010;...

56
1 LLM-domain containing B-GATA factors control different aspects of 1 cytokinin-regulated development in Arabidopsis thaliana 2 Quirin L. Ranftl 1 , Emmanouil Bastakis 1 , Carina Klermund 1 and Claus 3 Schwechheimer 1,2 4 5 Plant Systems Biology 6 Wissenschaftszentrum Weihenstephan 7 Technische Universität München 8 Emil-Ramann-Strasse 8 9 85354 Freising 10 Germany 11 12 One sentence summary Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA transcription 13 factors control greening, hypocotyl elongation, phyllotaxy, floral organ 14 initiation, branching, flowering time and senescence. 15 16 Footnotes This work was supported by grants from the Deutsche 17 Forschungsgemeinschaft to C.S. (SCHW751/9-1 and SCHW751/10-1 in the 18 SPP1530). C.S. would like to thank the Nirit and Michael Shaoul Fund for 19 Visiting Scholars and Fellows for financial support during manuscript 20 preparation. 21 22 Corresponding author Claus Schwechheimer, 23 [email protected] 24 25 Author contributions Q.L.R. and C.S. designed all experiments and wrote 26 the paper; Q.L.R. performed all experiments and data analysis apart from the 27 microarray and the ChIP-seq analyses; Q.L.R. and C.K. performed and 28 analyzed the microarray experiment; E.B. and C.S. designed the ChIP-seq 29 experiment, E.B. performed and analyzed the ChIP-seq experiment. 30 Plant Physiology Preview. Published on February 1, 2016, as DOI:10.1104/pp.15.01556 Copyright 2016 by the American Society of Plant Biologists www.plantphysiol.org on October 10, 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright © 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists. All rights reserved.

Upload: phunglien

Post on 11-Oct-2018

215 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

1

LLM-domain containing B-GATA factors control different aspects of 1

cytokinin-regulated development in Arabidopsis thaliana 2

Quirin L Ranftl1 Emmanouil Bastakis1 Carina Klermund1 and Claus 3

Schwechheimer12 4

5

Plant Systems Biology 6

Wissenschaftszentrum Weihenstephan 7

Technische Universitaumlt Muumlnchen 8

Emil-Ramann-Strasse 8 9

85354 Freising 10

Germany 11

12

One sentence summary Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA transcription 13

factors control greening hypocotyl elongation phyllotaxy floral organ 14

initiation branching flowering time and senescence 15

16

Footnotes This work was supported by grants from the Deutsche 17

Forschungsgemeinschaft to CS (SCHW7519-1 and SCHW75110-1 in the 18

SPP1530) CS would like to thank the Nirit and Michael Shaoul Fund for 19

Visiting Scholars and Fellows for financial support during manuscript 20

preparation 21

22

Corresponding author Claus Schwechheimer 23

clausschwechheimerwzwtumde 24

25

Author contributions QLR and CS designed all experiments and wrote 26

the paper QLR performed all experiments and data analysis apart from the 27

microarray and the ChIP-seq analyses QLR and CK performed and 28

analyzed the microarray experiment EB and CS designed the ChIP-seq 29

experiment EB performed and analyzed the ChIP-seq experiment 30

Plant Physiology Preview Published on February 1 2016 as DOI101104pp1501556

Copyright 2016 by the American Society of Plant Biologists

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

2

ABSTRACT 31

LLM-domain B-GATAs are a subfamily of the thirty-membered GATA 32

transcription factor family from Arabidopsis thaliana Only two of the six 33

Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC (GATA NITRATE-INDUCIBLE 34

CARBON METABOLISM-INVOLVED) and its paralog GNLCGA1 (GNC-35

LIKECYTOKININ-RESPONSIVE GATA FACTOR1) have already been 36

analyzed with regard to their biological function Together GNC and GNL 37

control germination greening flowering time and senescence downstream 38

from auxin CK (cytokinin) gibberellin and light signaling Whereas 39

overexpression and complementation analyses suggest a redundant 40

biochemical function between GNC and GNL nothing is known about the 41

biological role of the four other LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 42

GATA17 and GATA17L (GATA17-LIKE) based on loss-of-function mutant 43

phenotypes Here we examine insertion mutants of the six Arabidopsis B-44

GATA genes and reveal the role of these genes in the control of greening 45

hypocotyl elongation phyllotaxy floral organ initiation accessory meristem 46

formation flowering time and senescence Several of these phenotypes had 47

previously not been described for the gnc and gnl mutants or were enhanced 48

in the more complex mutants when compared to gnc gnl mutants Some of 49

the respective responses may be mediated by CK signaling which activates 50

the expression of all six GATA genes CK-induced gene expression is partially 51

compromised in LLM-domain B-GATA mutants suggesting that B-GATA 52

genes play a role in CK responses We furthermore provide evidence for a 53

transcriptional cross-regulation between these GATAs that may in at least 54

some cases be at the basis of their apparent functional redundancy 55

56

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

3

INTRODUCTION 57

Transcription factors of the GATA family contain a type IV zinc finger DNA-58

binding domain (C-X2-C-X17-20-C-X2-C) which is predicted to bind the 59

consensus DNA sequence WGATAR (where W is T or A and R is G or A) 60

(Reyes et al 2004) The genomes of higher plants encode approximately 30 61

GATA transcription factors which are classified as A- B- C- and D-GATAs 62

according to their primary amino acid sequence the conservation of their 63

GATA DNA-binding domains the conservation of protein domains outside of 64

the GATA DNA-binding domain and their exon-intron structures (Reyes et al 65

2004) We recently showed that the Arabidopsis thaliana B-GATAs can be 66

further subdivided into two structural subfamilies with either a HAN- or an 67

LLM-domain located N- or C-terminally of the GATA DNA-binding domain 68

(Behringer et al 2014 Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) The HAN-69

domain was initially identified as a conserved domain in the floral morphology 70

regulator HAN (HANABA TARANU) (Zhao et al 2004 Nawy et al 2010 71

Zhang et al 2013) the LLM-domain was named after the invariant leucine-72

leucine-methionine (LLM) motif in the conserved C-terminus of the respective 73

B-GATAs (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 74

A recent comparative analysis of B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Solanum 75

lycopersicon (tomato) Hordeum vulgare (barley) and Brachipodium 76

distachyon (Brachipodium) revealed that HAN-domain and LLM-domain B-77

GATAs have different biological and biochemical activities the expression of 78

HAN-domain B-GATAs under the control of an LLM-domain B-GATA 79

promoter could not complement LLM-domain B-GATA loss-of-function 80

mutants and the overexpression of HAN- and LLM-domain B-GATAs in 81

Arabidopsis differentially affected plant growth (Behringer et al 2014 82

Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) The existence of the Brassicaceae-83

specific GATA23 which has a degenerate LLM-domain as well as the 84

existence of monocot-specific HAN-domain B-GATAs reveal that expansions 85

of the B-GATA family have been used during plant evolution to control specific 86

aspects of plant development (De Rybel et al 2010 Whipple et al 2010 87

Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) 88

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

4

The Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA family is comprised of GATA15 89

GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L (GATA17-LIKE) as well as GNC (GATA 90

NITRATE-INDUCIBLE CARBON METABOLISM-INVOLVED GATA21 91

hitherto GNC) and GNL (GNC-LIKECYTOKININ-RESPONSIVE GATA 92

FACTOR1 hitherto GNL) (Behringer et al 2014 Behringer and 93

Schwechheimer 2015) Among these the paralogous GNC and GNL are 94

already well characterized with regard to their biological function and their 95

upstream regulation gnc and gnc gnl mutants are defective in greening and 96

chloroplast biogenesis and they germinate and flower slightly earlier than the 97

wild type (Bi et al 2005 Richter et al 2010 Chiang et al 2012 Richter et 98

al 2013) Conversely overexpression of the two GATAs results in a strong 99

increase in chlorophyll accumulation and delayed germination and flowering 100

(Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013 Behringer et al 2014) In addition 101

GNC and GNL overexpression promotes hypocotyl elongation in light-grown 102

seedlings alterations in leaf shape and an increased angle between the 103

primary and lateral inflorescences (Behringer et al 2014) Importantly 104

deletion or mutation of the LLM-domain of GNC or GNL compromises some 105

but not all phenotypes when these deletion or mutant variants are 106

overexpressed in Arabidopsis and the effects of the overexpression 107

transgenes are compared to the effects of the overexpression of the wild type 108

proteins (Behringer et al 2014) The fact that the overexpression of every 109

LLM-domain B-GATA factor tested to date results in highly comparable 110

phenotypes suggested that LLM-domain B-GATAs have conserved 111

biochemical functions (Behringer et al 2014) 112

A range of studies have already addressed the upstream signaling pathways 113

controlling GNC and GNL expression GNC was initially identified as a nitrate-114

inducible gene with an apparent role in the control of greening (Bi et al 2005) 115

GNL was originally identified based on its strong CK- (cytokinin-)regulated 116

gene expression and therefore designated CYTOKININ-RESPONSIVE GATA 117

FACTOR1 (CGA1) (Naito et al 2007) The expression of GNC and GNL is 118

also controlled by the DELLA regulators of the GA (gibberellin) signaling 119

pathway as well as by the light-labile PIFs (PHYTOCHROME INTERACTING 120

FACTORS) of the phytochrome signaling pathway which are themselves 121

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

5

negatively regulated by DELLAs (Richter et al 2010 Leivar and Monte 122

2014) Furthermore the auxin signaling regulators ARF2 (AUXIN RESPONSE 123

FACTOR2) and ARF7 the flowering regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR-OF-124

OVEREXPRESSION-OF-CONSTANS1) as well as the floral development 125

regulators AP3 (APETALA3) and (PI) PISTILLATA have been implicated in 126

GNC and GNL transcription control (Mara and Irish 2008 Richter et al 2010 127

Richter et al 2013 Richter et al 2013) Thus multiple signaling pathways 128

converge on GNC and GNL expression and the two genes control a broad 129

range of developmental responses in plants 130

To date nothing is known about the regulation and biological function of the 131

four Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 132

GATA17L Here we examine the entire LLM-domain B-GATA gene family 133

through the analysis of single gene insertion mutants and a range of mutant 134

combinations These analyses reveal mainly overlapping roles for these B-135

GATAs in the control of previously known B-GATA-regulated processes such 136

as greening hypocotyl elongation flowering time and senescence but they 137

also reveal previously unknown functions of LLM-domain B-GATAs in 138

phyllotactic patterning floral organ initiation and accessory meristem 139

formation Several of these responses may be mediated by CK signaling and 140

CK treatments induce the expression of all six GATA genes CK-induced gene 141

expression is partially compromised in LLM-domain B-GATA mutants 142

suggesting that B-GATA genes play a role in CK responses Furthermore we 143

provide evidence for a cross-regulation of the different LLM-domain B-GATA 144

genes at the transcriptional level 145

146

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

6

RESULTS 147

Evolutionary conservation of the LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 148

Brassicaceae The Arabidopsis thaliana genome encodes six LLM-domain 149

GATA transcription factors namely GNC (AtGATA21) GNL (AtGATA22) as 150

well as GATA15 (AtGATA15) GATA16 (AtGATA16) GATA17 (AtGATA17) 151

and GATA17L (AtGATA17-LIKE) (Behringer et al 2014 Behringer and 152

Schwechheimer 2015) Phylogenetic analyses showed that these proteins 153

can be grouped into three pairs of highly homologous proteins comprised of 154

the with regard to the length of their N-termini long B-GATAs GNC and GNL 155

and the short B-GATAs GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and 156

GATA17L respectively (Fig 1A and B Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014 157

Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) It had previously become apparent 158

that the respective subfamilies of long and short B-GATAs were conserved in 159

different plant species but that gene duplications in individual subfamilies may 160

have led to a differential expansion of these subfamilies in different species 161

(Behringer et al 2014) To gain an insight into the conservation of these 162

GATAs within the family of Brassicaceae we searched for LLM-domain B-163

GATAs in the fully sequenced genomes of Arabidopsis lyrata Capsella 164

rubella Eutrema salsugineum and Brassica rapa We retrieved orthologs for 165

each of the six Arabidopsis B-GATAs within each Brassicaceae species (Fig 166

S1 and Fig S2) Whereas the Arabidopsis lyrata Capsella rubella and 167

Eutrema salsugineum genomes contained exactly one apparent ortholog for 168

each of the six Arabidopsis thaliana genes the Brassica rapa genome known 169

to have undergone hexaploidization followed by genome fractionation 170

retained at least two orthologs each for GNC GNL GATA17 and GATA17L 171

and one ortholog of GATA15 and GATA16 (Fig S1 and Fig S2) (Wang et al 172

2011 Tang et al 2012) In summary we concluded that the six LLM-domain 173

B-GATAs are conserved in the different Brassicaceae examined here and that 174

four members of the gene family were present in multiple copies in Brassica 175

rapa 176

177

Characterization of insertion mutants of the six LLM-domain B-GATA 178

genes All previously published genetic analyses of the LLM-domain B-179

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

7

GATAs genes from Arabidopsis thaliana focused on GNC and GNL 180

(Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) As yet no mutants have been 181

described for the remaining four LLM-domain B-GATAs and their biological 182

function remains elusive We therefore identified homozygous lines of T-DNA 183

insertion mutants for each of the six genes (Fig 1C Fig S3) and 184

subsequently analyzed these lines with regard to the effects of the respective 185

mutations on gene expression using quantitative real time PCR (qRT-PCR) 186

and semi-quantitative PCR (sqRT-PCR) (Fig S3B) The analysis of the gnc 187

allele (Salk_001778) which had already been used in several publications 188

suggested that neither the full-length transcript nor regions downstream from 189

the insertion site were transcribed (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) (Richter et al 2010) 190

(Bi et al 2005) Similarly analyses of the gnl insertion mutant (Salk_003995) 191

using primers spanning the entire transcript or flanking the T-DNA harbored in 192

the intron suggested that the GNL full-length transcript was absent (Fig 1C 193

and Fig S3B) (Bi et al 2005 Richter et al 2010) Although one of the 194

selected GATA15 insertion alleles (gata15-1 SAIL_618_B11) was annotated 195

as an in-gene insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) we found no evidence for a 196

change of GATA15 gene expression in the homozygous insertion line (Fig 1C 197

and Fig S3B) Sequencing of the insertion site then revealed that the 198

insertion was downstream from the genersquos 3-UTR (untranslated region) 199

indicating that the GATA15 gene was intact in SAIL_618_B11 (Fig 1C and 200

Fig S3B) The analysis of a second allele (gata15-2 WiscDsLox471A10) with 201

an exon-insertion revealed a strong down-regulation of GATA15 expression in 202

both RT-PCR analyses (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) In a GATA16 allele with a T-203

DNA insertion in the genersquos 3-UTR (gata16-1 Salk_021471) transcript 204

abundance was partially reduced (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) The abundance of 205

GATA17 was also partially reduced in Salk_101994 (gata17-1) which 206

harbored a T-DNA insertion in the genes 5-UTR and strongly reduced in 207

SALK_049041 (gata17-2) which carried an insertion in the LLM-domain-208

encoding gene region (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) Finally we detected no 209

transcript in our analyses of a GATA17L exon insertion allele (gata17l-1 210

Salk_026798) when using primer pairs spanning the insertion or located 211

downstream from the insertion site (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) When analyzing 212

this allele with a primer combination upstream of the insertion we were able 213

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

8

to detect residual transcript in gata17l-1 but judged that this may not give rise 214

to a fully functional protein since the insertion was upstream of the LLM-215

domain (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) We concluded that the expression of the 216

respective GATA genes was absent or at least strongly reduced in alleles for 217

GNC (gnc) GNL (gnl) GATA15 (gata15-2) GATA17 (gata17-2) and 218

GATA17L (gata17l-1) alleles The gata16-1 and gata17-1 alleles were only 219

partially impaired in the expression of the respective genes whereas the 220

gata15-1 allele was not affected in GATA15 expression The gata15-2 and 221

gata17-2 alleles became available to us only later in this study and for 222

strategic reasons could not be included in the generation of the complex 223

mutant combinations described below Any of the phenotypes described in the 224

following sections for the more complex mutant combinations were not 225

apparent in the gata15-2 and gata17-2 single mutants We therefore exclude 226

the possibility that these genes are by themselves responsible for any of the 227

phenotypes described here for the higher order mutants 228

229

LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening We did not observe 230

any obvious defects in the gata single mutants apart from the already well-231

documented defects in greening of the gnc mutants (Bi et al 2005 Richter et 232

al 2010 Chiang et al 2012) To generate higher order mutants in the 233

closely related B-GATA genes we combined the alleles gnc gnl gata15-1 234

gata16-1 gata17-1 and gata17l-1 For simplicity we will subsequently omit 235

the respective allele numbers Since the presence of the misannotated 236

gata15-1 mutation does not provide information about the loss of GATA15 we 237

refer to this allele as GATA15 238

Through genetic crosses we obtained gata17 gata17l double mutants 239

GATA15 gata16 gata17 gata17l gnc gnl GATA15 gata16 and gnc gnl gata17 240

gata17l triple and quadruple mutants as well as a gnc gnl GATA15 gata16 241

gata17 gata17l quintuple mutant In the following we will refer to the gata 242

quintuple mutant as the quintuple mutant and to the GATA15 gata16 gata17 243

gata17l triple mutant that does not include the gnc and gnl alleles as the 244

(complementary) triple mutant In all other cases we will specify the allele 245

combinations 246

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

9

To examine a possible redundant function among the B-GATAs in the control 247

of greening we analyzed greening and chlorophyll content in 14 day-old light-248

grown gata mutant plants (Fig 1D and E) Although there was no indication 249

for a defect in greening in gata17 gata17l or in the triple mutant we found that 250

the greening defect of gnc gnl was further enhanced in the gnc gnl gata17 251

gata17l quadruple mutant and even more in the quintuple mutant (Fig 1D and 252

E) At the same time greening defects were not obvious in any of the gata 253

single mutants (Fig 1E) In the case of the gata15 and gata17 alleles this 254

was not due to the fact that weak alleles had been chosen for the complex 255

mutants since also the severe alleles gata15-2 and gata17-2 showed no 256

reduction in chlorophyll levels when compared to the wild type (Fig 1E) 257

The further reduction in chlorophyll accumulation in the quintuple mutant was 258

also apparent when we analyzed chlorophyll abundance by fluorescence 259

microscopy where we found reduced chloroplast fluorescence when 260

comparing the quintuple mutant to gnc gnl (Fig 1F) Furthermore we noted 261

that the greening defect gradually disappeared in gnc gnl mutants after the 262

seedling stage but remained apparent in the quintuple mutants also in adult 263

plants (Fig S4) Taken together this suggested that all mutated GATA genes 264

participate in the control of greening and chlorophyll accumulation and that 265

the defects of mutants defective in a single gene may be suppressed by the 266

presence of the other family members 267

268

Gene expression regulation of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 269

had been in the focus of several studies based on the strong regulation of 270

their gene expression by light and CK (Bi et al 2005 Naito et al 2007 271

Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) We were therefore interested in 272

evaluating to what extent light and CK regulate the expression of the other 273

GATA genes In the case of light regulation we found that far-red red as well 274

as blue light strongly induced the expression of GNL and to some extent also 275

the expression of GNC (Fig 2) In blue light we noted a subtle but significant 276

induction of GATA15 and GATA16 (Fig 2C) Importantly this regulation was 277

not observed in the red and far-red light receptor mutant phyA phyB or in the 278

blue light receptor mutant cry1 cry2 (Fig 2) Furthermore light-induced gene 279

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

10

expression changes in red light were impaired in the quadruple mutant for the 280

PHYTOCHROME INTERACTING FACTOR (PIF) genes PIF1 PIF3 PIF4 281

and PIF5 (pifq) indicating that the light-dependent regulation in red light was 282

mediated by the phytochrome and PIF signaling pathways (Fig S5) (Leivar et 283

al 2008) 284

The CK experiments indicated that CK induces the expression of all six GATA 285

genes (Fig 3) With an about three-fold increase in transcript abundance this 286

induction was strongest for GNL but could be observed for each of the other 287

GATA genes after a one to four hour CK treatment (Fig 3) Thus CK 288

promotes the expression of all six LLM-domain B-GATAs 289

290

Mutants of LLM-domain B-GATAs are impaired in hypocotyl elongation 291

Due to the strong regulation particularly of GNL but also of GNC in far-red red 292

and blue light conditions we examined the contribution of the GATA genes to 293

hypocotyl elongation by analyzing mutant seedlings in the different light 294

conditions in two different light intensities (Fig 4) Here we found that 295

quintuple mutant seedlings had a shorter hypocotyl than wild type seedlings in 296

white light as well as in red far-red and blue light (Fig 4) Notably these 297

phenotypes were not apparent or at least not significant in the gnc gnl 298

double mutant or the triple mutant suggesting that the respective other GATA 299

genes may contribute to the hypocotyl elongation phenotype in these 300

backgrounds (Fig 4) At the same time hypocotyl length of dark-grown 301

mutant seedlings was indistinguishable in all genotypes from that observed in 302

the wild type (Fig 4E and G) The short hypocotyl phenotype of the GATA 303

gene mutants was also interesting because we previously observed that the 304

LLM-domain B-GATA overexpressors had a longer hypocotyl than the wild 305

type when grown in white light (Behringer et al 2014) When analyzed in the 306

different light conditions we found the long hypocotyl phenotype of the GNL 307

overexpression line (GNLox) was also present in far-red and blue light but 308

interestingly not in red light where hypocotyls were even shorter than in the 309

wild type or the mutants when grown in weak red light conditions (Fig 4) 310

311

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

11

GATA gene mutants have differential gene expression defects The 312

strong induction of GNL gene expression by CK was already repeatedly 313

described and is the reason for the genersquos original designation CGA1 314

(CYTOKININ-INDUCED GATA1) (Naito et al 2007 Kollmer et al 2011) In 315

order to examine the role of the GATA genes in CK-responsive gene 316

expression we performed microarray experiments with 14 day-old wild type 317

plants gnc gnl and triple mutants as well as quintuple mutants treated for 60 318

min with the CK 6-BA (6-benzylaminopurine) or a corresponding mock solvent 319

control (Fig 5 and Fig 6 Supplemental Tables S1 and S2) We then 320

analyzed the resulting data with regard to differences in basal gene 321

expression (Fig 5) and with regard to gene expression differences after the 322

CK treatment in comparison to the mock control (Fig 6) For technical 323

reasons the experiment was conducted in two rounds the first experiment 324

included the Col-0 (1) wild type control the gnc gnl double mutant and the 325

quintuple mutant the second experiment included an independent Col-0 (2) 326

wild type control and the triple mutant When we examined the expression of 327

the CK-induced ARRs (A-TYPE RESPONSE REGULATORS) of the CK 328

signaling pathway we could confirm that the respective CK induction 329

experiments were comparably efficient between the two experiments and in 330

all genotypes tested (Fig S6A) We also examined the microarray dataset 331

with regard to the expression of a previously defined so-called ldquogolden listrdquo of 332

CK-regulated genes (Bhargava et al 2013) Over 70 of the 331 entities 333

derived from this list were significantly CK-regulated in our experiments 334

(Supplemental Table S3) When applying a two-fold expression change as 335

additional filter criterion 71 of these 331 entities were identified as up- (Col-0 336

1 and Col-0 2) and 39 (Col-0 1) and 25 entities (Col-0 2) as down-regulated 337

after CK treatment (Fig S6B and Supplemental Table S3) We thus 338

concluded that the CK treatments in both experiments were similarly efficient 339

and that the data sets could be used for comparative analyses 340

The comparison of the basal gene expression profiles of the wild type 341

samples and the mutants indicated that the (untreated) quintuple mutant 342

seedlings had by far the largest number of differentially regulated genes with 343

4722 down-regulated and 976 up-regulated entities when compared to the 344

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

12

Col-0 (1) wild type (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) Furthermore the gnc 345

gnl double mutant contained 2458 down- and 294 up-regulated entities 346

respectively (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) In comparison the number 347

of differentially expressed genes was comparatively minor in the triple mutant 348

which had only 323 down- and 278 up-regulated entities in this particular 349

experiment and selected physiological growth conditions (Fig 5) 350

The comparatively strong gene expression differences in the gnc gnl double 351

and the quintuple mutants and the fact that both mutants shared the gnc gnl 352

loss-of-function at the genetic level was reflected by the large overlap 353

between the differentially expressed gene sets of the two genotypes 354

Specifically 1922 of the 2458 down-regulated entities from gnc gnl were also 355

down-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 5B) and 98 of the 294 entities 356

up-regulated in gnc gnl were also up-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 357

5B) Conversely the overlap in gene expression defects between the triple 358

mutant and the quintuple mutant was higher than that between the triple 359

mutant and gnc gnl (Fig 5B) We therefore concluded that the gene 360

expression differences between the different GATA gene mutants was 361

strongest in the quintuple mutant and that the strong increase in the number 362

of differentially regulated genes exceeded by far the differences seen in the 363

gnc gnl double mutant and the triple mutant This supported our conclusion 364

from the phenotypic analyses that the GATA genes act in a functionally 365

redundant manner 366

Since we had observed increased gene expression of all six GATA genes 367

after CK-treatment we expected that CK-induced gene expression may be 368

compromised in the gata mutants (Fig 6) Indeed of the 996 entities that 369

were down-regulated after CK-treatment in the wild type (Col-0 1) only 173 370

(18 ) and 89 (9 ) remained CK-regulated in the quintuple and gnc gnl 371

mutant respectively (Fig 6A and Supplemental Table S2) At the same time 372

of the 188 entities that were down-regulated after CK treatment in the wild 373

type sample of the second experiment (Col-0 2) 83 (44 ) remained CK-374

regulated in the gata triple mutant (Fig 6B) The differential effect on gene 375

expression between the different mutants was less pronounced when 376

examining the CK-induced genes Here 49 (quintuple mutant) 59 (gnc 377

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

13

gnl) and 63 (triple mutant) of the CK-induced entities from the respective 378

wild types remained CK-regulated in the mutants (Fig 6A and B) In summary 379

we concluded that CK-regulated gene expression is impaired in the GATA 380

gene mutants 381

382

GATA gene mutants are defective in CK-regulated developmental 383

processes Based on the strong defects of gata mutants in CK-regulated 384

gene expression we searched for phenotypes that could be explained by 385

defects in CK response CK signaling was described as a regulator of 386

phyllotactic patterning in the shoot apical meristem of Arabidopsis (Besnard et 387

al 2014) In line with a role of the LLM-domain B-GATA genes in this process 388

we observed frequent aberrations from normal phyllotactic patterning in flower 389

positioning in triple and quintuple mutant inflorescences (Fig 7) Quantitative 390

analyses revealed aberrations from the canonical angle of ~1375deg in about 391

~30 of the petioles in triple and quintuple inflorescences (Fig 7D) At the 392

same time this patterning defect was not apparent in the gnc gnl double 393

mutant Since we also did not observe a quantitative increase in the severity 394

of this phenotype between the triple and the quintuple mutant we concluded 395

that GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L may be responsible for this phenotype 396

(Fig 7D) 397

Leaf senescence is another CK-regulated process (Hwang et al 2012) In the 398

wild type CK levels are reduced during senescence and positive or negative 399

interference with the decrease in CK levels can promote and delay 400

senescence respectively (Hwang et al 2012) Senescence can be induced 401

by shifting light-grown plants to the dark and we had previously already shown 402

that leaf senescence is delayed in overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-403

GATAs (Behringer et al 2014) To examine possible senescence defects in 404

the gata mutants we floated leaves of wild type and mutant plants in the dark 405

on a mock solution or on a solution containing 005 microM or 01 microM 6-BA (Fig 406

8A ndash F) (Weaver and Amasino 2001) In line with the expectation that the 407

presence of CK in the medium would suppress the senescence process we 408

observed decreased senescence in CK-treated wild type leaves which we 409

quantitatively assessed by measuring chlorophyll levels in the mock- and CK-410

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

14

treated leaves (Fig 8F) Here we found that the effects of the senescence 411

treatment were less efficiently suppressed by CK treatments in the gnc gnl 412

double and in the quintuple mutant than in the wild type or the triple mutant 413

(Fig 8A - F) Similarly we observed a stronger effect on the decreases in 414

chlorophyll and total protein levels in the gnc gnl as well as the quintuple 415

mutant when we transferred light-grown plants for four days to the dark (Fig 416

8G ndash I) As previously reported GNL overexpressing plants (GNLox) had 417

senescence phenotypes that were antagonistic to the ones observed with the 418

mutants (Fig 8) (Behringer et al 2014) In the case of the leaf floating assay 419

CK-treatment had a stronger effect on greening and chlorophyll abundance in 420

GNLox than in the wild type (Fig 8A ndash F) When we transferred plants from 421

the light to the dark GNLox seedlings remained visibly green and did not 422

display the strong decrease in total protein abundance that we observed in 423

the wild type or the GATA gene mutants (Fig 8G ndash I) We thus concluded that 424

GATA gene mutants and overexpressors have antagonistic effects with 425

regard to the regulation of senescence and that GNC and GNL contribute 426

particularly strongly to this phenotype 427

CK induces greening in light-grown seedlings (Kobayashi et al 2012) To 428

examine to what extent CK can induce chlorophyll accumulation in the gata 429

mutants we grew plants for two weeks in constant light on medium containing 430

CK (5 nM BA) or a corresponding CK-free medium As expected chlorophyll 431

content was increased in wild type plants but this increase was neither 432

significant in the gnc gnl nor the triple or the quintuple mutants (Fig S7) We 433

thus concluded that the GATA factors are required for CK-induced greening in 434

Arabidopsis seedlings 435

It was previously reported that hypocotyl elongation could be repressed by 436

incubating dark-grown seedlings in the presence of CK (Su and Howell 1995) 437

Since the GATA gene mutants had displayed a hypocotyl elongation defect in 438

light-grown seedlings (Fig 4) we also explored the link between hypocotyl 439

elongation and CK However when we tested the effects of CK on hypocotyl 440

elongation in dark-grown seedlings we did not detect any significant 441

differences in the response between the different genotypes tested (Fig S8) 442

It is thus unlikely that the GATA genes participate in this elongation response 443

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

15

Branching is another phenotype that has been attributed to defects in CK 444

biosynthesis and response (El-Showk et al 2013) When we analyzed the 445

general habitus of the quintuple mutants we noted that they had an increased 446

number of secondary branches that was combined with a reduced plant 447

height (Fig 9A - C) Occasionally we also observed the outgrowth of 448

inflorescences in the axils of lateral inflorescences in the mutants whereas we 449

had not noted this phenotype in the wild type (Fig 9D and E) A quantitative 450

analysis of these phenotypes over all gata mutant phenotypes revealed that 451

the number of first and second order lateral branches increased with 452

increasing mutant complexity (Fig 9B) Here we observed strong effects 453

already in the gata17 gata17l mutant as well as the gnc gnl double mutant but 454

strongest defects in the triple and the quintuple mutant thus all five GATA 455

genes may contribute to this phenotype (Fig 9B) At the same time plant 456

height was reduced to a significant but still minor level in these mutants 457

suggesting that decreases in plant height which may have indirect 458

consequences on the general plant habitus and branching are not the 459

primary cause for altered branching patterns in the gata mutants (Fig 9C) It 460

is further important to note that the higher order GATA gene mutants initiated 461

fewer vegetative buds but had a higher number of growing buds as reflected 462

by the increased branch numbers (Fig 9F) Thus axillary bud formation is 463

promoted and bud outgrowth is repressed by the GATAs in the wild type 464

Another phenotype that became apparent during our analysis of the gata 465

mutant plant habitus was an increase in the angle formed between the 466

primary inflorescence and the lateral inflorescences (Fig 9G and H Fig S9) 467

gata mutants had a decreased angle formed between the primary 468

inflorescence and lateral inflorescences and this phenotype was strongest in 469

the quintuple mutant and intermediate in the gnc gnl and triple mutants (Fig 470

9G and H Fig S9) Interestingly we had previously observed increased 471

branch angles in GATA overexpression lines such as GNLox (Fig S9) 472

(Behringer et al 2014) We thus concluded that GATA gene mutants and 473

overexpressors antagonistically regulate branch angles in Arabidopsis 474

475

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

16

GATA genes regulate petal and sepal numbers as well as silique length 476

CK signaling has recently been implicated in the control of floral development 477

(Han et al 2014) When we analyzed gata mutant flowers in more detail we 478

noted with interest aberrations in floral organ numbers in comparison to the 479

wild type (Fig 10A) Whereas wild type flowers have generally four sepals 480

and four petals and only rarely deviate from this pattern (in our study in 481

around 2 of the cases) a strong increase in flowers with more than four 482

(generally five in rare cases six) petals and sepals became apparent in the 483

higher order gata mutants (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) In the gata17 gata17l 484

mutants we observed flowers with more than four sepals and petals in 12 of 485

all flowers and this number was slightly enhanced in the triple mutant (13 486

petals) and the quintuple mutant (14 petals) (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) 487

Importantly the single mutants with the clearest apparent effect were the 488

gata17 and gata17l mutants and inversely mutations in GNC and GNL 489

contributed only to a minor extent to this phenotype (Fig S10A) In summary 490

this analysis revealed that GATA17 and GATA17L make a particularly strong 491

contribution to the floral morphology phenotype of the gata mutants 492

Since we had previously noted that overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-493

GATAs have short siliques and a reduced number of seeds per silique we 494

also analyzed silique length and seed set in the gata mutants (Fig S10B - D) 495

In line with an antagonistic regulation of these traits in the gata mutants we 496

measured significant increases in seed set in the siliques of the gnc gnl the 497

triple as well as the quintuple mutants and we detected significant increases 498

in silique length in all mutant backgrounds (Fig S10B - D) We thus concluded 499

that the GATA genes repress silique elongation and seed set in the wild type 500

at least to a minor extent A differential contribution of individual GATAs to 501

these phenotypes could however not be resolved here 502

503

GATA gene mutants have antagonistic effects on flowering time in long 504

and short days Accelerated flowering in plants grown under long-day 505

conditions was another phenotype previously described for gnc gnl mutants 506

(Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) Conversely overexpression of the 507

LLM-domain B-GATAs causes a strong delay in flowering (Richter et al 508

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

17

2010 Richter et al 2013 Behringer et al 2014) To examine the contribution 509

of the other GATA factors to the flowering time phenotype we grew the gata 510

mutant series in long day and short day conditions with a 16 hr and 8 hr light 511

period respectively (Fig 10B and C Fig S11) Interestingly we observed a 512

gradual acceleration of flowering in long day-grown plants that was weakest in 513

the single mutants more pronounced in the double triple quadruple mutants 514

and strongest in the quintuple mutants (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) 515

We thus concluded that all LLM-domain B-GATA genes examined here may 516

contribute to the repression of flowering in long day-grown plants 517

Interestingly the effects of the reduced GATA gene function on flowering time 518

in short day conditions were antagonistic to those observed in long day-grown 519

plants in that the complex GATA gene mutants flowered much later than the 520

wild type or the less complex mutant combinations when flowering was 521

counted in days (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) We thus concluded that 522

the LLM-domain B-GATAs factors regulate flowering time in long and short 523

day conditions but in view of the antagonistic nature of this regulation that 524

their contribution to flowering time control may be complex 525

526

Cross-regulation of GATA gene expression Since several of our genetic 527

analyses had suggested a functional redundancy between the GATA genes 528

we looked for evidences of a cross-regulation of GATA gene expression in the 529

gnc gnl double mutant background There we detected indeed an increased 530

transcript abundance of GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 531

mutant which could be compensatory for the loss of GNC and GNL (Fig 11A) 532

At the same time GATA15 GATA16 and GATA17L gene expression levels 533

were significantly reduced in GNL overexpression lines (GNLox) suggesting 534

that GNL may regulate the expression of these genes 535

Since these observations indicated that molecular mechanisms may exist that 536

compensate for the loss of individual LLM-domain B-GATA genes eg in the 537

gnc gnl mutants we examined the binding of GNL to the LLM-domain GATA 538

gene promoters after ChIP-seq analysis (chromatin immunoprecipitation 539

followed by DNA sequencing) Here we found that at least three of the six 540

LLM-domain B-GATA genes were bound by GNL after immunoprecipitation of 541

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

18

HA-tagged GNL from transgenic plants expressing a functional GNLHA 542

transgene from a GNL promoter fragment in the gnc gnl background 543

(pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl Fig 11B) Through subsequent ChIP-PCR studies 544

targeting selected regions upstream from GNC GNL and GATA17 we could 545

confirm this binding through independent analyses (Fig 11C) Thus LLM-546

domain B-GATA factors may directly regulate their own expression as well as 547

that of other family members 548

549

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

19

DISCUSSION 550

In the present study we have characterized the six-membered family of LLM-551

domain B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Whereas the family has diverged when 552

compared between Arabidopsis tomato barley and Brachypodium a clear 553

conservation of this protein family can be observed within the Brassicaceae 554

family (Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014) Within the Brassicaceae GNC and 555

GNL GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and GATA17L form closely 556

related LLM-domain B-GATA pairs In a previous study we had comparatively 557

analyzed transgenic Arabidopsis lines expressing different members of the 558

LLM-domain B-GATA gene family from Arabidopsis barley and tomato and 559

concluded that these genes are functionally redundant at the biochemical 560

level since their overexpression resulted in highly similar phenotypes 561

(Behringer et al 2014) Several of the phenotypes analyzed here namely 562

greening (Fig 1D-F) hypocotyl elongation (Fig 4) plant height branching 563

patterns (Fig 9) branch angles (Fig 9 and Fig S9) silique length seed set 564

(Fig S10) flowering time (Fig 10) as well as senescence (Fig 8) are 565

strongest in the gata quintuple mutant and weaker or in some cases not even 566

apparent in the less complex gata mutant combinations Thus in line with this 567

previous study our present analysis shows that the LLM-domain B-GATA 568

genes from Arabidopsis have a shared biological function in the control of 569

multiple developmental pathways 570

Due to the high complexity of the available range of single double triple 571

quadruple and quintuple mutants we restricted many of our phenotypic 572

analyses to the gnc gnl double the complementary triple and the quintuple 573

mutants It can nevertheless be suggested based on the presently available 574

data that some phenotypes are predominantly controlled by a single LLM-575

domain B-GATA or rather an LLM-domain B-GATA gene pair Phyllotactic 576

patterning as assessed here in the inflorescence is impaired in the gata triple 577

but not in the gnc gnl double mutant (Fig 7) Similarly the increases in floral 578

organ numbers are already very prominent in the gata17 gata17l double 579

mutants and not much more enhanced in the gata triple or quintuple mutant 580

that includes the gata17 gata17l mutations (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) Thus 581

the LLM-domain B-GATA genes have shared overlapping but also distinct 582

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

20

roles in the control of plant development The fact that GATA15 gene function 583

is not impaired in the selected GATA15 gene insertion allele does not allow us 584

to draw any direct conclusions on the biological function of this gene based on 585

the data presented here Furthermore the fact that the mutant alleles of 586

GATA16 and GATA17 used in the complex mutants are only partially 587

defective in GATA gene expression could suggest that even stronger 588

phenotypes may be observed if loss-of-function alleles were used The two 589

strong alleles for GATA15 (gata15-2) and GATA17 (gata17-2) isolated here 590

but analyzed only as single mutants may help in the future to understand the 591

biological function of these GATA genes at further depth 592

It is interesting that the overexpression lines and the mutants of these GATA 593

genes frequently have antagonistic phenotypes This study in combination 594

with a previous study identifies such antagonistically regulated phenotypes in 595

the control of greening hypocotyl elongation branch angle formation 596

flowering time and senescence (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 597

Particularly in the case of transcription factors where the loss-of-function or 598

overexpression may affect the expression of many downstream targets genes 599

and developmental responses triggered by these target genes one may not 600

expect such a clear antagonistic relationship between mutants with reduced 601

gene functions and the overexpressors In view of the fact that 602

overexpressors likely also control the expression of genes that are normally 603

not targeted by this transcription factor when expressed from their native 604

promoter (off-targets) this observation is even more striking It may suggest 605

that the GATAs examined here control developmental responses in a dosage-606

dependent manner together with other critical factors In this context the 607

presence and abundance of the GATAs would just modulate the response but 608

would by itself not be sufficient to trigger it Further analyses will be required 609

to gain a more detailed understanding of the mode of action of the LLM-610

domain B-GATA factors in the control of gene expression 611

We had previously shown that the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 612

repress flowering since their loss-of-function mutants and overexpressors 613

displayed an early and late flowering phenotype respectively when plants 614

were grown in long-day conditions (Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) 615

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

21

We furthermore showed that the control of flowering is partially mediated by 616

the flowering time regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION 617

OF CONSTANS1) which acts downstream from GNC and GNL and whose 618

promoter can be directly bound by GNC and GNL (Richter et al 2013) In line 619

with these previous observations we show here that the complex GATA gene 620

mutants flower even earlier than the gnc gnl mutant further substantiating our 621

conclusion that LLM-domain B-GATAs are flowering time regulators in 622

Arabidopsis (Fig 10B and Fig S11) Surprisingly the complex gata mutants 623

flowered late when grown in short day conditions and their phenotype was 624

thereby antagonistic to the phenotype observed in long days (Fig 10C and 625

Fig S9) The reason for this antagonistic flowering time behavior remains to 626

be resolved but a complex scenario may be envisioned We also do not want 627

to rule out that physiological parameters become limiting in the induction of 628

flowering in the gata mutants Long term defects as a result of their reduced 629

greening may play a limiting role during the extended growth in short days 630

with short illumination periods that are not limiting when plants are grown in 631

long days 632

Several of our phenotypic analyses suggested that the LLM-domain B-GATAs 633

act in concert to control specific phenotypes The fact that at least some of the 634

phenotypes were most pronounced in the quintuple mutant and not apparent 635

or only weak in the less complex mutants suggests that the LLM-domain B-636

GATAs may cross-regulate their expression and that presence and absence 637

of one GATA could interfere with the abundance of other GATA family 638

members We have analyzed this hypothesis here by examining the 639

expression of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 640

GATA17L in the gnc gnl mutant and in the GNL overexpression line (Fig 11A) 641

In both cases we found the expression of three of the four analyzed genes to 642

be differentially regulated in the two genetic backgrounds suggesting that the 643

GATAs can cross-regulate their gene expression and supporting again the 644

hypothesis that the GATAs have a repressive activity on the transcription of 645

the other GATA genes Further support for such a hypothetical cross-646

regulation came from a ChIP-seq analysis with GNL where we observed a 647

strong binding of GNL when expressed from its own promoter to the three 648

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

2

ABSTRACT 31

LLM-domain B-GATAs are a subfamily of the thirty-membered GATA 32

transcription factor family from Arabidopsis thaliana Only two of the six 33

Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC (GATA NITRATE-INDUCIBLE 34

CARBON METABOLISM-INVOLVED) and its paralog GNLCGA1 (GNC-35

LIKECYTOKININ-RESPONSIVE GATA FACTOR1) have already been 36

analyzed with regard to their biological function Together GNC and GNL 37

control germination greening flowering time and senescence downstream 38

from auxin CK (cytokinin) gibberellin and light signaling Whereas 39

overexpression and complementation analyses suggest a redundant 40

biochemical function between GNC and GNL nothing is known about the 41

biological role of the four other LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 42

GATA17 and GATA17L (GATA17-LIKE) based on loss-of-function mutant 43

phenotypes Here we examine insertion mutants of the six Arabidopsis B-44

GATA genes and reveal the role of these genes in the control of greening 45

hypocotyl elongation phyllotaxy floral organ initiation accessory meristem 46

formation flowering time and senescence Several of these phenotypes had 47

previously not been described for the gnc and gnl mutants or were enhanced 48

in the more complex mutants when compared to gnc gnl mutants Some of 49

the respective responses may be mediated by CK signaling which activates 50

the expression of all six GATA genes CK-induced gene expression is partially 51

compromised in LLM-domain B-GATA mutants suggesting that B-GATA 52

genes play a role in CK responses We furthermore provide evidence for a 53

transcriptional cross-regulation between these GATAs that may in at least 54

some cases be at the basis of their apparent functional redundancy 55

56

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

3

INTRODUCTION 57

Transcription factors of the GATA family contain a type IV zinc finger DNA-58

binding domain (C-X2-C-X17-20-C-X2-C) which is predicted to bind the 59

consensus DNA sequence WGATAR (where W is T or A and R is G or A) 60

(Reyes et al 2004) The genomes of higher plants encode approximately 30 61

GATA transcription factors which are classified as A- B- C- and D-GATAs 62

according to their primary amino acid sequence the conservation of their 63

GATA DNA-binding domains the conservation of protein domains outside of 64

the GATA DNA-binding domain and their exon-intron structures (Reyes et al 65

2004) We recently showed that the Arabidopsis thaliana B-GATAs can be 66

further subdivided into two structural subfamilies with either a HAN- or an 67

LLM-domain located N- or C-terminally of the GATA DNA-binding domain 68

(Behringer et al 2014 Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) The HAN-69

domain was initially identified as a conserved domain in the floral morphology 70

regulator HAN (HANABA TARANU) (Zhao et al 2004 Nawy et al 2010 71

Zhang et al 2013) the LLM-domain was named after the invariant leucine-72

leucine-methionine (LLM) motif in the conserved C-terminus of the respective 73

B-GATAs (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 74

A recent comparative analysis of B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Solanum 75

lycopersicon (tomato) Hordeum vulgare (barley) and Brachipodium 76

distachyon (Brachipodium) revealed that HAN-domain and LLM-domain B-77

GATAs have different biological and biochemical activities the expression of 78

HAN-domain B-GATAs under the control of an LLM-domain B-GATA 79

promoter could not complement LLM-domain B-GATA loss-of-function 80

mutants and the overexpression of HAN- and LLM-domain B-GATAs in 81

Arabidopsis differentially affected plant growth (Behringer et al 2014 82

Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) The existence of the Brassicaceae-83

specific GATA23 which has a degenerate LLM-domain as well as the 84

existence of monocot-specific HAN-domain B-GATAs reveal that expansions 85

of the B-GATA family have been used during plant evolution to control specific 86

aspects of plant development (De Rybel et al 2010 Whipple et al 2010 87

Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) 88

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

4

The Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA family is comprised of GATA15 89

GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L (GATA17-LIKE) as well as GNC (GATA 90

NITRATE-INDUCIBLE CARBON METABOLISM-INVOLVED GATA21 91

hitherto GNC) and GNL (GNC-LIKECYTOKININ-RESPONSIVE GATA 92

FACTOR1 hitherto GNL) (Behringer et al 2014 Behringer and 93

Schwechheimer 2015) Among these the paralogous GNC and GNL are 94

already well characterized with regard to their biological function and their 95

upstream regulation gnc and gnc gnl mutants are defective in greening and 96

chloroplast biogenesis and they germinate and flower slightly earlier than the 97

wild type (Bi et al 2005 Richter et al 2010 Chiang et al 2012 Richter et 98

al 2013) Conversely overexpression of the two GATAs results in a strong 99

increase in chlorophyll accumulation and delayed germination and flowering 100

(Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013 Behringer et al 2014) In addition 101

GNC and GNL overexpression promotes hypocotyl elongation in light-grown 102

seedlings alterations in leaf shape and an increased angle between the 103

primary and lateral inflorescences (Behringer et al 2014) Importantly 104

deletion or mutation of the LLM-domain of GNC or GNL compromises some 105

but not all phenotypes when these deletion or mutant variants are 106

overexpressed in Arabidopsis and the effects of the overexpression 107

transgenes are compared to the effects of the overexpression of the wild type 108

proteins (Behringer et al 2014) The fact that the overexpression of every 109

LLM-domain B-GATA factor tested to date results in highly comparable 110

phenotypes suggested that LLM-domain B-GATAs have conserved 111

biochemical functions (Behringer et al 2014) 112

A range of studies have already addressed the upstream signaling pathways 113

controlling GNC and GNL expression GNC was initially identified as a nitrate-114

inducible gene with an apparent role in the control of greening (Bi et al 2005) 115

GNL was originally identified based on its strong CK- (cytokinin-)regulated 116

gene expression and therefore designated CYTOKININ-RESPONSIVE GATA 117

FACTOR1 (CGA1) (Naito et al 2007) The expression of GNC and GNL is 118

also controlled by the DELLA regulators of the GA (gibberellin) signaling 119

pathway as well as by the light-labile PIFs (PHYTOCHROME INTERACTING 120

FACTORS) of the phytochrome signaling pathway which are themselves 121

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

5

negatively regulated by DELLAs (Richter et al 2010 Leivar and Monte 122

2014) Furthermore the auxin signaling regulators ARF2 (AUXIN RESPONSE 123

FACTOR2) and ARF7 the flowering regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR-OF-124

OVEREXPRESSION-OF-CONSTANS1) as well as the floral development 125

regulators AP3 (APETALA3) and (PI) PISTILLATA have been implicated in 126

GNC and GNL transcription control (Mara and Irish 2008 Richter et al 2010 127

Richter et al 2013 Richter et al 2013) Thus multiple signaling pathways 128

converge on GNC and GNL expression and the two genes control a broad 129

range of developmental responses in plants 130

To date nothing is known about the regulation and biological function of the 131

four Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 132

GATA17L Here we examine the entire LLM-domain B-GATA gene family 133

through the analysis of single gene insertion mutants and a range of mutant 134

combinations These analyses reveal mainly overlapping roles for these B-135

GATAs in the control of previously known B-GATA-regulated processes such 136

as greening hypocotyl elongation flowering time and senescence but they 137

also reveal previously unknown functions of LLM-domain B-GATAs in 138

phyllotactic patterning floral organ initiation and accessory meristem 139

formation Several of these responses may be mediated by CK signaling and 140

CK treatments induce the expression of all six GATA genes CK-induced gene 141

expression is partially compromised in LLM-domain B-GATA mutants 142

suggesting that B-GATA genes play a role in CK responses Furthermore we 143

provide evidence for a cross-regulation of the different LLM-domain B-GATA 144

genes at the transcriptional level 145

146

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

6

RESULTS 147

Evolutionary conservation of the LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 148

Brassicaceae The Arabidopsis thaliana genome encodes six LLM-domain 149

GATA transcription factors namely GNC (AtGATA21) GNL (AtGATA22) as 150

well as GATA15 (AtGATA15) GATA16 (AtGATA16) GATA17 (AtGATA17) 151

and GATA17L (AtGATA17-LIKE) (Behringer et al 2014 Behringer and 152

Schwechheimer 2015) Phylogenetic analyses showed that these proteins 153

can be grouped into three pairs of highly homologous proteins comprised of 154

the with regard to the length of their N-termini long B-GATAs GNC and GNL 155

and the short B-GATAs GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and 156

GATA17L respectively (Fig 1A and B Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014 157

Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) It had previously become apparent 158

that the respective subfamilies of long and short B-GATAs were conserved in 159

different plant species but that gene duplications in individual subfamilies may 160

have led to a differential expansion of these subfamilies in different species 161

(Behringer et al 2014) To gain an insight into the conservation of these 162

GATAs within the family of Brassicaceae we searched for LLM-domain B-163

GATAs in the fully sequenced genomes of Arabidopsis lyrata Capsella 164

rubella Eutrema salsugineum and Brassica rapa We retrieved orthologs for 165

each of the six Arabidopsis B-GATAs within each Brassicaceae species (Fig 166

S1 and Fig S2) Whereas the Arabidopsis lyrata Capsella rubella and 167

Eutrema salsugineum genomes contained exactly one apparent ortholog for 168

each of the six Arabidopsis thaliana genes the Brassica rapa genome known 169

to have undergone hexaploidization followed by genome fractionation 170

retained at least two orthologs each for GNC GNL GATA17 and GATA17L 171

and one ortholog of GATA15 and GATA16 (Fig S1 and Fig S2) (Wang et al 172

2011 Tang et al 2012) In summary we concluded that the six LLM-domain 173

B-GATAs are conserved in the different Brassicaceae examined here and that 174

four members of the gene family were present in multiple copies in Brassica 175

rapa 176

177

Characterization of insertion mutants of the six LLM-domain B-GATA 178

genes All previously published genetic analyses of the LLM-domain B-179

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

7

GATAs genes from Arabidopsis thaliana focused on GNC and GNL 180

(Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) As yet no mutants have been 181

described for the remaining four LLM-domain B-GATAs and their biological 182

function remains elusive We therefore identified homozygous lines of T-DNA 183

insertion mutants for each of the six genes (Fig 1C Fig S3) and 184

subsequently analyzed these lines with regard to the effects of the respective 185

mutations on gene expression using quantitative real time PCR (qRT-PCR) 186

and semi-quantitative PCR (sqRT-PCR) (Fig S3B) The analysis of the gnc 187

allele (Salk_001778) which had already been used in several publications 188

suggested that neither the full-length transcript nor regions downstream from 189

the insertion site were transcribed (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) (Richter et al 2010) 190

(Bi et al 2005) Similarly analyses of the gnl insertion mutant (Salk_003995) 191

using primers spanning the entire transcript or flanking the T-DNA harbored in 192

the intron suggested that the GNL full-length transcript was absent (Fig 1C 193

and Fig S3B) (Bi et al 2005 Richter et al 2010) Although one of the 194

selected GATA15 insertion alleles (gata15-1 SAIL_618_B11) was annotated 195

as an in-gene insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) we found no evidence for a 196

change of GATA15 gene expression in the homozygous insertion line (Fig 1C 197

and Fig S3B) Sequencing of the insertion site then revealed that the 198

insertion was downstream from the genersquos 3-UTR (untranslated region) 199

indicating that the GATA15 gene was intact in SAIL_618_B11 (Fig 1C and 200

Fig S3B) The analysis of a second allele (gata15-2 WiscDsLox471A10) with 201

an exon-insertion revealed a strong down-regulation of GATA15 expression in 202

both RT-PCR analyses (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) In a GATA16 allele with a T-203

DNA insertion in the genersquos 3-UTR (gata16-1 Salk_021471) transcript 204

abundance was partially reduced (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) The abundance of 205

GATA17 was also partially reduced in Salk_101994 (gata17-1) which 206

harbored a T-DNA insertion in the genes 5-UTR and strongly reduced in 207

SALK_049041 (gata17-2) which carried an insertion in the LLM-domain-208

encoding gene region (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) Finally we detected no 209

transcript in our analyses of a GATA17L exon insertion allele (gata17l-1 210

Salk_026798) when using primer pairs spanning the insertion or located 211

downstream from the insertion site (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) When analyzing 212

this allele with a primer combination upstream of the insertion we were able 213

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

8

to detect residual transcript in gata17l-1 but judged that this may not give rise 214

to a fully functional protein since the insertion was upstream of the LLM-215

domain (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) We concluded that the expression of the 216

respective GATA genes was absent or at least strongly reduced in alleles for 217

GNC (gnc) GNL (gnl) GATA15 (gata15-2) GATA17 (gata17-2) and 218

GATA17L (gata17l-1) alleles The gata16-1 and gata17-1 alleles were only 219

partially impaired in the expression of the respective genes whereas the 220

gata15-1 allele was not affected in GATA15 expression The gata15-2 and 221

gata17-2 alleles became available to us only later in this study and for 222

strategic reasons could not be included in the generation of the complex 223

mutant combinations described below Any of the phenotypes described in the 224

following sections for the more complex mutant combinations were not 225

apparent in the gata15-2 and gata17-2 single mutants We therefore exclude 226

the possibility that these genes are by themselves responsible for any of the 227

phenotypes described here for the higher order mutants 228

229

LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening We did not observe 230

any obvious defects in the gata single mutants apart from the already well-231

documented defects in greening of the gnc mutants (Bi et al 2005 Richter et 232

al 2010 Chiang et al 2012) To generate higher order mutants in the 233

closely related B-GATA genes we combined the alleles gnc gnl gata15-1 234

gata16-1 gata17-1 and gata17l-1 For simplicity we will subsequently omit 235

the respective allele numbers Since the presence of the misannotated 236

gata15-1 mutation does not provide information about the loss of GATA15 we 237

refer to this allele as GATA15 238

Through genetic crosses we obtained gata17 gata17l double mutants 239

GATA15 gata16 gata17 gata17l gnc gnl GATA15 gata16 and gnc gnl gata17 240

gata17l triple and quadruple mutants as well as a gnc gnl GATA15 gata16 241

gata17 gata17l quintuple mutant In the following we will refer to the gata 242

quintuple mutant as the quintuple mutant and to the GATA15 gata16 gata17 243

gata17l triple mutant that does not include the gnc and gnl alleles as the 244

(complementary) triple mutant In all other cases we will specify the allele 245

combinations 246

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

9

To examine a possible redundant function among the B-GATAs in the control 247

of greening we analyzed greening and chlorophyll content in 14 day-old light-248

grown gata mutant plants (Fig 1D and E) Although there was no indication 249

for a defect in greening in gata17 gata17l or in the triple mutant we found that 250

the greening defect of gnc gnl was further enhanced in the gnc gnl gata17 251

gata17l quadruple mutant and even more in the quintuple mutant (Fig 1D and 252

E) At the same time greening defects were not obvious in any of the gata 253

single mutants (Fig 1E) In the case of the gata15 and gata17 alleles this 254

was not due to the fact that weak alleles had been chosen for the complex 255

mutants since also the severe alleles gata15-2 and gata17-2 showed no 256

reduction in chlorophyll levels when compared to the wild type (Fig 1E) 257

The further reduction in chlorophyll accumulation in the quintuple mutant was 258

also apparent when we analyzed chlorophyll abundance by fluorescence 259

microscopy where we found reduced chloroplast fluorescence when 260

comparing the quintuple mutant to gnc gnl (Fig 1F) Furthermore we noted 261

that the greening defect gradually disappeared in gnc gnl mutants after the 262

seedling stage but remained apparent in the quintuple mutants also in adult 263

plants (Fig S4) Taken together this suggested that all mutated GATA genes 264

participate in the control of greening and chlorophyll accumulation and that 265

the defects of mutants defective in a single gene may be suppressed by the 266

presence of the other family members 267

268

Gene expression regulation of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 269

had been in the focus of several studies based on the strong regulation of 270

their gene expression by light and CK (Bi et al 2005 Naito et al 2007 271

Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) We were therefore interested in 272

evaluating to what extent light and CK regulate the expression of the other 273

GATA genes In the case of light regulation we found that far-red red as well 274

as blue light strongly induced the expression of GNL and to some extent also 275

the expression of GNC (Fig 2) In blue light we noted a subtle but significant 276

induction of GATA15 and GATA16 (Fig 2C) Importantly this regulation was 277

not observed in the red and far-red light receptor mutant phyA phyB or in the 278

blue light receptor mutant cry1 cry2 (Fig 2) Furthermore light-induced gene 279

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

10

expression changes in red light were impaired in the quadruple mutant for the 280

PHYTOCHROME INTERACTING FACTOR (PIF) genes PIF1 PIF3 PIF4 281

and PIF5 (pifq) indicating that the light-dependent regulation in red light was 282

mediated by the phytochrome and PIF signaling pathways (Fig S5) (Leivar et 283

al 2008) 284

The CK experiments indicated that CK induces the expression of all six GATA 285

genes (Fig 3) With an about three-fold increase in transcript abundance this 286

induction was strongest for GNL but could be observed for each of the other 287

GATA genes after a one to four hour CK treatment (Fig 3) Thus CK 288

promotes the expression of all six LLM-domain B-GATAs 289

290

Mutants of LLM-domain B-GATAs are impaired in hypocotyl elongation 291

Due to the strong regulation particularly of GNL but also of GNC in far-red red 292

and blue light conditions we examined the contribution of the GATA genes to 293

hypocotyl elongation by analyzing mutant seedlings in the different light 294

conditions in two different light intensities (Fig 4) Here we found that 295

quintuple mutant seedlings had a shorter hypocotyl than wild type seedlings in 296

white light as well as in red far-red and blue light (Fig 4) Notably these 297

phenotypes were not apparent or at least not significant in the gnc gnl 298

double mutant or the triple mutant suggesting that the respective other GATA 299

genes may contribute to the hypocotyl elongation phenotype in these 300

backgrounds (Fig 4) At the same time hypocotyl length of dark-grown 301

mutant seedlings was indistinguishable in all genotypes from that observed in 302

the wild type (Fig 4E and G) The short hypocotyl phenotype of the GATA 303

gene mutants was also interesting because we previously observed that the 304

LLM-domain B-GATA overexpressors had a longer hypocotyl than the wild 305

type when grown in white light (Behringer et al 2014) When analyzed in the 306

different light conditions we found the long hypocotyl phenotype of the GNL 307

overexpression line (GNLox) was also present in far-red and blue light but 308

interestingly not in red light where hypocotyls were even shorter than in the 309

wild type or the mutants when grown in weak red light conditions (Fig 4) 310

311

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

11

GATA gene mutants have differential gene expression defects The 312

strong induction of GNL gene expression by CK was already repeatedly 313

described and is the reason for the genersquos original designation CGA1 314

(CYTOKININ-INDUCED GATA1) (Naito et al 2007 Kollmer et al 2011) In 315

order to examine the role of the GATA genes in CK-responsive gene 316

expression we performed microarray experiments with 14 day-old wild type 317

plants gnc gnl and triple mutants as well as quintuple mutants treated for 60 318

min with the CK 6-BA (6-benzylaminopurine) or a corresponding mock solvent 319

control (Fig 5 and Fig 6 Supplemental Tables S1 and S2) We then 320

analyzed the resulting data with regard to differences in basal gene 321

expression (Fig 5) and with regard to gene expression differences after the 322

CK treatment in comparison to the mock control (Fig 6) For technical 323

reasons the experiment was conducted in two rounds the first experiment 324

included the Col-0 (1) wild type control the gnc gnl double mutant and the 325

quintuple mutant the second experiment included an independent Col-0 (2) 326

wild type control and the triple mutant When we examined the expression of 327

the CK-induced ARRs (A-TYPE RESPONSE REGULATORS) of the CK 328

signaling pathway we could confirm that the respective CK induction 329

experiments were comparably efficient between the two experiments and in 330

all genotypes tested (Fig S6A) We also examined the microarray dataset 331

with regard to the expression of a previously defined so-called ldquogolden listrdquo of 332

CK-regulated genes (Bhargava et al 2013) Over 70 of the 331 entities 333

derived from this list were significantly CK-regulated in our experiments 334

(Supplemental Table S3) When applying a two-fold expression change as 335

additional filter criterion 71 of these 331 entities were identified as up- (Col-0 336

1 and Col-0 2) and 39 (Col-0 1) and 25 entities (Col-0 2) as down-regulated 337

after CK treatment (Fig S6B and Supplemental Table S3) We thus 338

concluded that the CK treatments in both experiments were similarly efficient 339

and that the data sets could be used for comparative analyses 340

The comparison of the basal gene expression profiles of the wild type 341

samples and the mutants indicated that the (untreated) quintuple mutant 342

seedlings had by far the largest number of differentially regulated genes with 343

4722 down-regulated and 976 up-regulated entities when compared to the 344

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

12

Col-0 (1) wild type (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) Furthermore the gnc 345

gnl double mutant contained 2458 down- and 294 up-regulated entities 346

respectively (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) In comparison the number 347

of differentially expressed genes was comparatively minor in the triple mutant 348

which had only 323 down- and 278 up-regulated entities in this particular 349

experiment and selected physiological growth conditions (Fig 5) 350

The comparatively strong gene expression differences in the gnc gnl double 351

and the quintuple mutants and the fact that both mutants shared the gnc gnl 352

loss-of-function at the genetic level was reflected by the large overlap 353

between the differentially expressed gene sets of the two genotypes 354

Specifically 1922 of the 2458 down-regulated entities from gnc gnl were also 355

down-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 5B) and 98 of the 294 entities 356

up-regulated in gnc gnl were also up-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 357

5B) Conversely the overlap in gene expression defects between the triple 358

mutant and the quintuple mutant was higher than that between the triple 359

mutant and gnc gnl (Fig 5B) We therefore concluded that the gene 360

expression differences between the different GATA gene mutants was 361

strongest in the quintuple mutant and that the strong increase in the number 362

of differentially regulated genes exceeded by far the differences seen in the 363

gnc gnl double mutant and the triple mutant This supported our conclusion 364

from the phenotypic analyses that the GATA genes act in a functionally 365

redundant manner 366

Since we had observed increased gene expression of all six GATA genes 367

after CK-treatment we expected that CK-induced gene expression may be 368

compromised in the gata mutants (Fig 6) Indeed of the 996 entities that 369

were down-regulated after CK-treatment in the wild type (Col-0 1) only 173 370

(18 ) and 89 (9 ) remained CK-regulated in the quintuple and gnc gnl 371

mutant respectively (Fig 6A and Supplemental Table S2) At the same time 372

of the 188 entities that were down-regulated after CK treatment in the wild 373

type sample of the second experiment (Col-0 2) 83 (44 ) remained CK-374

regulated in the gata triple mutant (Fig 6B) The differential effect on gene 375

expression between the different mutants was less pronounced when 376

examining the CK-induced genes Here 49 (quintuple mutant) 59 (gnc 377

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

13

gnl) and 63 (triple mutant) of the CK-induced entities from the respective 378

wild types remained CK-regulated in the mutants (Fig 6A and B) In summary 379

we concluded that CK-regulated gene expression is impaired in the GATA 380

gene mutants 381

382

GATA gene mutants are defective in CK-regulated developmental 383

processes Based on the strong defects of gata mutants in CK-regulated 384

gene expression we searched for phenotypes that could be explained by 385

defects in CK response CK signaling was described as a regulator of 386

phyllotactic patterning in the shoot apical meristem of Arabidopsis (Besnard et 387

al 2014) In line with a role of the LLM-domain B-GATA genes in this process 388

we observed frequent aberrations from normal phyllotactic patterning in flower 389

positioning in triple and quintuple mutant inflorescences (Fig 7) Quantitative 390

analyses revealed aberrations from the canonical angle of ~1375deg in about 391

~30 of the petioles in triple and quintuple inflorescences (Fig 7D) At the 392

same time this patterning defect was not apparent in the gnc gnl double 393

mutant Since we also did not observe a quantitative increase in the severity 394

of this phenotype between the triple and the quintuple mutant we concluded 395

that GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L may be responsible for this phenotype 396

(Fig 7D) 397

Leaf senescence is another CK-regulated process (Hwang et al 2012) In the 398

wild type CK levels are reduced during senescence and positive or negative 399

interference with the decrease in CK levels can promote and delay 400

senescence respectively (Hwang et al 2012) Senescence can be induced 401

by shifting light-grown plants to the dark and we had previously already shown 402

that leaf senescence is delayed in overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-403

GATAs (Behringer et al 2014) To examine possible senescence defects in 404

the gata mutants we floated leaves of wild type and mutant plants in the dark 405

on a mock solution or on a solution containing 005 microM or 01 microM 6-BA (Fig 406

8A ndash F) (Weaver and Amasino 2001) In line with the expectation that the 407

presence of CK in the medium would suppress the senescence process we 408

observed decreased senescence in CK-treated wild type leaves which we 409

quantitatively assessed by measuring chlorophyll levels in the mock- and CK-410

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

14

treated leaves (Fig 8F) Here we found that the effects of the senescence 411

treatment were less efficiently suppressed by CK treatments in the gnc gnl 412

double and in the quintuple mutant than in the wild type or the triple mutant 413

(Fig 8A - F) Similarly we observed a stronger effect on the decreases in 414

chlorophyll and total protein levels in the gnc gnl as well as the quintuple 415

mutant when we transferred light-grown plants for four days to the dark (Fig 416

8G ndash I) As previously reported GNL overexpressing plants (GNLox) had 417

senescence phenotypes that were antagonistic to the ones observed with the 418

mutants (Fig 8) (Behringer et al 2014) In the case of the leaf floating assay 419

CK-treatment had a stronger effect on greening and chlorophyll abundance in 420

GNLox than in the wild type (Fig 8A ndash F) When we transferred plants from 421

the light to the dark GNLox seedlings remained visibly green and did not 422

display the strong decrease in total protein abundance that we observed in 423

the wild type or the GATA gene mutants (Fig 8G ndash I) We thus concluded that 424

GATA gene mutants and overexpressors have antagonistic effects with 425

regard to the regulation of senescence and that GNC and GNL contribute 426

particularly strongly to this phenotype 427

CK induces greening in light-grown seedlings (Kobayashi et al 2012) To 428

examine to what extent CK can induce chlorophyll accumulation in the gata 429

mutants we grew plants for two weeks in constant light on medium containing 430

CK (5 nM BA) or a corresponding CK-free medium As expected chlorophyll 431

content was increased in wild type plants but this increase was neither 432

significant in the gnc gnl nor the triple or the quintuple mutants (Fig S7) We 433

thus concluded that the GATA factors are required for CK-induced greening in 434

Arabidopsis seedlings 435

It was previously reported that hypocotyl elongation could be repressed by 436

incubating dark-grown seedlings in the presence of CK (Su and Howell 1995) 437

Since the GATA gene mutants had displayed a hypocotyl elongation defect in 438

light-grown seedlings (Fig 4) we also explored the link between hypocotyl 439

elongation and CK However when we tested the effects of CK on hypocotyl 440

elongation in dark-grown seedlings we did not detect any significant 441

differences in the response between the different genotypes tested (Fig S8) 442

It is thus unlikely that the GATA genes participate in this elongation response 443

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

15

Branching is another phenotype that has been attributed to defects in CK 444

biosynthesis and response (El-Showk et al 2013) When we analyzed the 445

general habitus of the quintuple mutants we noted that they had an increased 446

number of secondary branches that was combined with a reduced plant 447

height (Fig 9A - C) Occasionally we also observed the outgrowth of 448

inflorescences in the axils of lateral inflorescences in the mutants whereas we 449

had not noted this phenotype in the wild type (Fig 9D and E) A quantitative 450

analysis of these phenotypes over all gata mutant phenotypes revealed that 451

the number of first and second order lateral branches increased with 452

increasing mutant complexity (Fig 9B) Here we observed strong effects 453

already in the gata17 gata17l mutant as well as the gnc gnl double mutant but 454

strongest defects in the triple and the quintuple mutant thus all five GATA 455

genes may contribute to this phenotype (Fig 9B) At the same time plant 456

height was reduced to a significant but still minor level in these mutants 457

suggesting that decreases in plant height which may have indirect 458

consequences on the general plant habitus and branching are not the 459

primary cause for altered branching patterns in the gata mutants (Fig 9C) It 460

is further important to note that the higher order GATA gene mutants initiated 461

fewer vegetative buds but had a higher number of growing buds as reflected 462

by the increased branch numbers (Fig 9F) Thus axillary bud formation is 463

promoted and bud outgrowth is repressed by the GATAs in the wild type 464

Another phenotype that became apparent during our analysis of the gata 465

mutant plant habitus was an increase in the angle formed between the 466

primary inflorescence and the lateral inflorescences (Fig 9G and H Fig S9) 467

gata mutants had a decreased angle formed between the primary 468

inflorescence and lateral inflorescences and this phenotype was strongest in 469

the quintuple mutant and intermediate in the gnc gnl and triple mutants (Fig 470

9G and H Fig S9) Interestingly we had previously observed increased 471

branch angles in GATA overexpression lines such as GNLox (Fig S9) 472

(Behringer et al 2014) We thus concluded that GATA gene mutants and 473

overexpressors antagonistically regulate branch angles in Arabidopsis 474

475

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

16

GATA genes regulate petal and sepal numbers as well as silique length 476

CK signaling has recently been implicated in the control of floral development 477

(Han et al 2014) When we analyzed gata mutant flowers in more detail we 478

noted with interest aberrations in floral organ numbers in comparison to the 479

wild type (Fig 10A) Whereas wild type flowers have generally four sepals 480

and four petals and only rarely deviate from this pattern (in our study in 481

around 2 of the cases) a strong increase in flowers with more than four 482

(generally five in rare cases six) petals and sepals became apparent in the 483

higher order gata mutants (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) In the gata17 gata17l 484

mutants we observed flowers with more than four sepals and petals in 12 of 485

all flowers and this number was slightly enhanced in the triple mutant (13 486

petals) and the quintuple mutant (14 petals) (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) 487

Importantly the single mutants with the clearest apparent effect were the 488

gata17 and gata17l mutants and inversely mutations in GNC and GNL 489

contributed only to a minor extent to this phenotype (Fig S10A) In summary 490

this analysis revealed that GATA17 and GATA17L make a particularly strong 491

contribution to the floral morphology phenotype of the gata mutants 492

Since we had previously noted that overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-493

GATAs have short siliques and a reduced number of seeds per silique we 494

also analyzed silique length and seed set in the gata mutants (Fig S10B - D) 495

In line with an antagonistic regulation of these traits in the gata mutants we 496

measured significant increases in seed set in the siliques of the gnc gnl the 497

triple as well as the quintuple mutants and we detected significant increases 498

in silique length in all mutant backgrounds (Fig S10B - D) We thus concluded 499

that the GATA genes repress silique elongation and seed set in the wild type 500

at least to a minor extent A differential contribution of individual GATAs to 501

these phenotypes could however not be resolved here 502

503

GATA gene mutants have antagonistic effects on flowering time in long 504

and short days Accelerated flowering in plants grown under long-day 505

conditions was another phenotype previously described for gnc gnl mutants 506

(Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) Conversely overexpression of the 507

LLM-domain B-GATAs causes a strong delay in flowering (Richter et al 508

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

17

2010 Richter et al 2013 Behringer et al 2014) To examine the contribution 509

of the other GATA factors to the flowering time phenotype we grew the gata 510

mutant series in long day and short day conditions with a 16 hr and 8 hr light 511

period respectively (Fig 10B and C Fig S11) Interestingly we observed a 512

gradual acceleration of flowering in long day-grown plants that was weakest in 513

the single mutants more pronounced in the double triple quadruple mutants 514

and strongest in the quintuple mutants (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) 515

We thus concluded that all LLM-domain B-GATA genes examined here may 516

contribute to the repression of flowering in long day-grown plants 517

Interestingly the effects of the reduced GATA gene function on flowering time 518

in short day conditions were antagonistic to those observed in long day-grown 519

plants in that the complex GATA gene mutants flowered much later than the 520

wild type or the less complex mutant combinations when flowering was 521

counted in days (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) We thus concluded that 522

the LLM-domain B-GATAs factors regulate flowering time in long and short 523

day conditions but in view of the antagonistic nature of this regulation that 524

their contribution to flowering time control may be complex 525

526

Cross-regulation of GATA gene expression Since several of our genetic 527

analyses had suggested a functional redundancy between the GATA genes 528

we looked for evidences of a cross-regulation of GATA gene expression in the 529

gnc gnl double mutant background There we detected indeed an increased 530

transcript abundance of GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 531

mutant which could be compensatory for the loss of GNC and GNL (Fig 11A) 532

At the same time GATA15 GATA16 and GATA17L gene expression levels 533

were significantly reduced in GNL overexpression lines (GNLox) suggesting 534

that GNL may regulate the expression of these genes 535

Since these observations indicated that molecular mechanisms may exist that 536

compensate for the loss of individual LLM-domain B-GATA genes eg in the 537

gnc gnl mutants we examined the binding of GNL to the LLM-domain GATA 538

gene promoters after ChIP-seq analysis (chromatin immunoprecipitation 539

followed by DNA sequencing) Here we found that at least three of the six 540

LLM-domain B-GATA genes were bound by GNL after immunoprecipitation of 541

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

18

HA-tagged GNL from transgenic plants expressing a functional GNLHA 542

transgene from a GNL promoter fragment in the gnc gnl background 543

(pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl Fig 11B) Through subsequent ChIP-PCR studies 544

targeting selected regions upstream from GNC GNL and GATA17 we could 545

confirm this binding through independent analyses (Fig 11C) Thus LLM-546

domain B-GATA factors may directly regulate their own expression as well as 547

that of other family members 548

549

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

19

DISCUSSION 550

In the present study we have characterized the six-membered family of LLM-551

domain B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Whereas the family has diverged when 552

compared between Arabidopsis tomato barley and Brachypodium a clear 553

conservation of this protein family can be observed within the Brassicaceae 554

family (Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014) Within the Brassicaceae GNC and 555

GNL GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and GATA17L form closely 556

related LLM-domain B-GATA pairs In a previous study we had comparatively 557

analyzed transgenic Arabidopsis lines expressing different members of the 558

LLM-domain B-GATA gene family from Arabidopsis barley and tomato and 559

concluded that these genes are functionally redundant at the biochemical 560

level since their overexpression resulted in highly similar phenotypes 561

(Behringer et al 2014) Several of the phenotypes analyzed here namely 562

greening (Fig 1D-F) hypocotyl elongation (Fig 4) plant height branching 563

patterns (Fig 9) branch angles (Fig 9 and Fig S9) silique length seed set 564

(Fig S10) flowering time (Fig 10) as well as senescence (Fig 8) are 565

strongest in the gata quintuple mutant and weaker or in some cases not even 566

apparent in the less complex gata mutant combinations Thus in line with this 567

previous study our present analysis shows that the LLM-domain B-GATA 568

genes from Arabidopsis have a shared biological function in the control of 569

multiple developmental pathways 570

Due to the high complexity of the available range of single double triple 571

quadruple and quintuple mutants we restricted many of our phenotypic 572

analyses to the gnc gnl double the complementary triple and the quintuple 573

mutants It can nevertheless be suggested based on the presently available 574

data that some phenotypes are predominantly controlled by a single LLM-575

domain B-GATA or rather an LLM-domain B-GATA gene pair Phyllotactic 576

patterning as assessed here in the inflorescence is impaired in the gata triple 577

but not in the gnc gnl double mutant (Fig 7) Similarly the increases in floral 578

organ numbers are already very prominent in the gata17 gata17l double 579

mutants and not much more enhanced in the gata triple or quintuple mutant 580

that includes the gata17 gata17l mutations (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) Thus 581

the LLM-domain B-GATA genes have shared overlapping but also distinct 582

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

20

roles in the control of plant development The fact that GATA15 gene function 583

is not impaired in the selected GATA15 gene insertion allele does not allow us 584

to draw any direct conclusions on the biological function of this gene based on 585

the data presented here Furthermore the fact that the mutant alleles of 586

GATA16 and GATA17 used in the complex mutants are only partially 587

defective in GATA gene expression could suggest that even stronger 588

phenotypes may be observed if loss-of-function alleles were used The two 589

strong alleles for GATA15 (gata15-2) and GATA17 (gata17-2) isolated here 590

but analyzed only as single mutants may help in the future to understand the 591

biological function of these GATA genes at further depth 592

It is interesting that the overexpression lines and the mutants of these GATA 593

genes frequently have antagonistic phenotypes This study in combination 594

with a previous study identifies such antagonistically regulated phenotypes in 595

the control of greening hypocotyl elongation branch angle formation 596

flowering time and senescence (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 597

Particularly in the case of transcription factors where the loss-of-function or 598

overexpression may affect the expression of many downstream targets genes 599

and developmental responses triggered by these target genes one may not 600

expect such a clear antagonistic relationship between mutants with reduced 601

gene functions and the overexpressors In view of the fact that 602

overexpressors likely also control the expression of genes that are normally 603

not targeted by this transcription factor when expressed from their native 604

promoter (off-targets) this observation is even more striking It may suggest 605

that the GATAs examined here control developmental responses in a dosage-606

dependent manner together with other critical factors In this context the 607

presence and abundance of the GATAs would just modulate the response but 608

would by itself not be sufficient to trigger it Further analyses will be required 609

to gain a more detailed understanding of the mode of action of the LLM-610

domain B-GATA factors in the control of gene expression 611

We had previously shown that the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 612

repress flowering since their loss-of-function mutants and overexpressors 613

displayed an early and late flowering phenotype respectively when plants 614

were grown in long-day conditions (Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) 615

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

21

We furthermore showed that the control of flowering is partially mediated by 616

the flowering time regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION 617

OF CONSTANS1) which acts downstream from GNC and GNL and whose 618

promoter can be directly bound by GNC and GNL (Richter et al 2013) In line 619

with these previous observations we show here that the complex GATA gene 620

mutants flower even earlier than the gnc gnl mutant further substantiating our 621

conclusion that LLM-domain B-GATAs are flowering time regulators in 622

Arabidopsis (Fig 10B and Fig S11) Surprisingly the complex gata mutants 623

flowered late when grown in short day conditions and their phenotype was 624

thereby antagonistic to the phenotype observed in long days (Fig 10C and 625

Fig S9) The reason for this antagonistic flowering time behavior remains to 626

be resolved but a complex scenario may be envisioned We also do not want 627

to rule out that physiological parameters become limiting in the induction of 628

flowering in the gata mutants Long term defects as a result of their reduced 629

greening may play a limiting role during the extended growth in short days 630

with short illumination periods that are not limiting when plants are grown in 631

long days 632

Several of our phenotypic analyses suggested that the LLM-domain B-GATAs 633

act in concert to control specific phenotypes The fact that at least some of the 634

phenotypes were most pronounced in the quintuple mutant and not apparent 635

or only weak in the less complex mutants suggests that the LLM-domain B-636

GATAs may cross-regulate their expression and that presence and absence 637

of one GATA could interfere with the abundance of other GATA family 638

members We have analyzed this hypothesis here by examining the 639

expression of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 640

GATA17L in the gnc gnl mutant and in the GNL overexpression line (Fig 11A) 641

In both cases we found the expression of three of the four analyzed genes to 642

be differentially regulated in the two genetic backgrounds suggesting that the 643

GATAs can cross-regulate their gene expression and supporting again the 644

hypothesis that the GATAs have a repressive activity on the transcription of 645

the other GATA genes Further support for such a hypothetical cross-646

regulation came from a ChIP-seq analysis with GNL where we observed a 647

strong binding of GNL when expressed from its own promoter to the three 648

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

3

INTRODUCTION 57

Transcription factors of the GATA family contain a type IV zinc finger DNA-58

binding domain (C-X2-C-X17-20-C-X2-C) which is predicted to bind the 59

consensus DNA sequence WGATAR (where W is T or A and R is G or A) 60

(Reyes et al 2004) The genomes of higher plants encode approximately 30 61

GATA transcription factors which are classified as A- B- C- and D-GATAs 62

according to their primary amino acid sequence the conservation of their 63

GATA DNA-binding domains the conservation of protein domains outside of 64

the GATA DNA-binding domain and their exon-intron structures (Reyes et al 65

2004) We recently showed that the Arabidopsis thaliana B-GATAs can be 66

further subdivided into two structural subfamilies with either a HAN- or an 67

LLM-domain located N- or C-terminally of the GATA DNA-binding domain 68

(Behringer et al 2014 Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) The HAN-69

domain was initially identified as a conserved domain in the floral morphology 70

regulator HAN (HANABA TARANU) (Zhao et al 2004 Nawy et al 2010 71

Zhang et al 2013) the LLM-domain was named after the invariant leucine-72

leucine-methionine (LLM) motif in the conserved C-terminus of the respective 73

B-GATAs (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 74

A recent comparative analysis of B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Solanum 75

lycopersicon (tomato) Hordeum vulgare (barley) and Brachipodium 76

distachyon (Brachipodium) revealed that HAN-domain and LLM-domain B-77

GATAs have different biological and biochemical activities the expression of 78

HAN-domain B-GATAs under the control of an LLM-domain B-GATA 79

promoter could not complement LLM-domain B-GATA loss-of-function 80

mutants and the overexpression of HAN- and LLM-domain B-GATAs in 81

Arabidopsis differentially affected plant growth (Behringer et al 2014 82

Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) The existence of the Brassicaceae-83

specific GATA23 which has a degenerate LLM-domain as well as the 84

existence of monocot-specific HAN-domain B-GATAs reveal that expansions 85

of the B-GATA family have been used during plant evolution to control specific 86

aspects of plant development (De Rybel et al 2010 Whipple et al 2010 87

Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) 88

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

4

The Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA family is comprised of GATA15 89

GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L (GATA17-LIKE) as well as GNC (GATA 90

NITRATE-INDUCIBLE CARBON METABOLISM-INVOLVED GATA21 91

hitherto GNC) and GNL (GNC-LIKECYTOKININ-RESPONSIVE GATA 92

FACTOR1 hitherto GNL) (Behringer et al 2014 Behringer and 93

Schwechheimer 2015) Among these the paralogous GNC and GNL are 94

already well characterized with regard to their biological function and their 95

upstream regulation gnc and gnc gnl mutants are defective in greening and 96

chloroplast biogenesis and they germinate and flower slightly earlier than the 97

wild type (Bi et al 2005 Richter et al 2010 Chiang et al 2012 Richter et 98

al 2013) Conversely overexpression of the two GATAs results in a strong 99

increase in chlorophyll accumulation and delayed germination and flowering 100

(Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013 Behringer et al 2014) In addition 101

GNC and GNL overexpression promotes hypocotyl elongation in light-grown 102

seedlings alterations in leaf shape and an increased angle between the 103

primary and lateral inflorescences (Behringer et al 2014) Importantly 104

deletion or mutation of the LLM-domain of GNC or GNL compromises some 105

but not all phenotypes when these deletion or mutant variants are 106

overexpressed in Arabidopsis and the effects of the overexpression 107

transgenes are compared to the effects of the overexpression of the wild type 108

proteins (Behringer et al 2014) The fact that the overexpression of every 109

LLM-domain B-GATA factor tested to date results in highly comparable 110

phenotypes suggested that LLM-domain B-GATAs have conserved 111

biochemical functions (Behringer et al 2014) 112

A range of studies have already addressed the upstream signaling pathways 113

controlling GNC and GNL expression GNC was initially identified as a nitrate-114

inducible gene with an apparent role in the control of greening (Bi et al 2005) 115

GNL was originally identified based on its strong CK- (cytokinin-)regulated 116

gene expression and therefore designated CYTOKININ-RESPONSIVE GATA 117

FACTOR1 (CGA1) (Naito et al 2007) The expression of GNC and GNL is 118

also controlled by the DELLA regulators of the GA (gibberellin) signaling 119

pathway as well as by the light-labile PIFs (PHYTOCHROME INTERACTING 120

FACTORS) of the phytochrome signaling pathway which are themselves 121

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

5

negatively regulated by DELLAs (Richter et al 2010 Leivar and Monte 122

2014) Furthermore the auxin signaling regulators ARF2 (AUXIN RESPONSE 123

FACTOR2) and ARF7 the flowering regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR-OF-124

OVEREXPRESSION-OF-CONSTANS1) as well as the floral development 125

regulators AP3 (APETALA3) and (PI) PISTILLATA have been implicated in 126

GNC and GNL transcription control (Mara and Irish 2008 Richter et al 2010 127

Richter et al 2013 Richter et al 2013) Thus multiple signaling pathways 128

converge on GNC and GNL expression and the two genes control a broad 129

range of developmental responses in plants 130

To date nothing is known about the regulation and biological function of the 131

four Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 132

GATA17L Here we examine the entire LLM-domain B-GATA gene family 133

through the analysis of single gene insertion mutants and a range of mutant 134

combinations These analyses reveal mainly overlapping roles for these B-135

GATAs in the control of previously known B-GATA-regulated processes such 136

as greening hypocotyl elongation flowering time and senescence but they 137

also reveal previously unknown functions of LLM-domain B-GATAs in 138

phyllotactic patterning floral organ initiation and accessory meristem 139

formation Several of these responses may be mediated by CK signaling and 140

CK treatments induce the expression of all six GATA genes CK-induced gene 141

expression is partially compromised in LLM-domain B-GATA mutants 142

suggesting that B-GATA genes play a role in CK responses Furthermore we 143

provide evidence for a cross-regulation of the different LLM-domain B-GATA 144

genes at the transcriptional level 145

146

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

6

RESULTS 147

Evolutionary conservation of the LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 148

Brassicaceae The Arabidopsis thaliana genome encodes six LLM-domain 149

GATA transcription factors namely GNC (AtGATA21) GNL (AtGATA22) as 150

well as GATA15 (AtGATA15) GATA16 (AtGATA16) GATA17 (AtGATA17) 151

and GATA17L (AtGATA17-LIKE) (Behringer et al 2014 Behringer and 152

Schwechheimer 2015) Phylogenetic analyses showed that these proteins 153

can be grouped into three pairs of highly homologous proteins comprised of 154

the with regard to the length of their N-termini long B-GATAs GNC and GNL 155

and the short B-GATAs GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and 156

GATA17L respectively (Fig 1A and B Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014 157

Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) It had previously become apparent 158

that the respective subfamilies of long and short B-GATAs were conserved in 159

different plant species but that gene duplications in individual subfamilies may 160

have led to a differential expansion of these subfamilies in different species 161

(Behringer et al 2014) To gain an insight into the conservation of these 162

GATAs within the family of Brassicaceae we searched for LLM-domain B-163

GATAs in the fully sequenced genomes of Arabidopsis lyrata Capsella 164

rubella Eutrema salsugineum and Brassica rapa We retrieved orthologs for 165

each of the six Arabidopsis B-GATAs within each Brassicaceae species (Fig 166

S1 and Fig S2) Whereas the Arabidopsis lyrata Capsella rubella and 167

Eutrema salsugineum genomes contained exactly one apparent ortholog for 168

each of the six Arabidopsis thaliana genes the Brassica rapa genome known 169

to have undergone hexaploidization followed by genome fractionation 170

retained at least two orthologs each for GNC GNL GATA17 and GATA17L 171

and one ortholog of GATA15 and GATA16 (Fig S1 and Fig S2) (Wang et al 172

2011 Tang et al 2012) In summary we concluded that the six LLM-domain 173

B-GATAs are conserved in the different Brassicaceae examined here and that 174

four members of the gene family were present in multiple copies in Brassica 175

rapa 176

177

Characterization of insertion mutants of the six LLM-domain B-GATA 178

genes All previously published genetic analyses of the LLM-domain B-179

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

7

GATAs genes from Arabidopsis thaliana focused on GNC and GNL 180

(Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) As yet no mutants have been 181

described for the remaining four LLM-domain B-GATAs and their biological 182

function remains elusive We therefore identified homozygous lines of T-DNA 183

insertion mutants for each of the six genes (Fig 1C Fig S3) and 184

subsequently analyzed these lines with regard to the effects of the respective 185

mutations on gene expression using quantitative real time PCR (qRT-PCR) 186

and semi-quantitative PCR (sqRT-PCR) (Fig S3B) The analysis of the gnc 187

allele (Salk_001778) which had already been used in several publications 188

suggested that neither the full-length transcript nor regions downstream from 189

the insertion site were transcribed (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) (Richter et al 2010) 190

(Bi et al 2005) Similarly analyses of the gnl insertion mutant (Salk_003995) 191

using primers spanning the entire transcript or flanking the T-DNA harbored in 192

the intron suggested that the GNL full-length transcript was absent (Fig 1C 193

and Fig S3B) (Bi et al 2005 Richter et al 2010) Although one of the 194

selected GATA15 insertion alleles (gata15-1 SAIL_618_B11) was annotated 195

as an in-gene insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) we found no evidence for a 196

change of GATA15 gene expression in the homozygous insertion line (Fig 1C 197

and Fig S3B) Sequencing of the insertion site then revealed that the 198

insertion was downstream from the genersquos 3-UTR (untranslated region) 199

indicating that the GATA15 gene was intact in SAIL_618_B11 (Fig 1C and 200

Fig S3B) The analysis of a second allele (gata15-2 WiscDsLox471A10) with 201

an exon-insertion revealed a strong down-regulation of GATA15 expression in 202

both RT-PCR analyses (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) In a GATA16 allele with a T-203

DNA insertion in the genersquos 3-UTR (gata16-1 Salk_021471) transcript 204

abundance was partially reduced (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) The abundance of 205

GATA17 was also partially reduced in Salk_101994 (gata17-1) which 206

harbored a T-DNA insertion in the genes 5-UTR and strongly reduced in 207

SALK_049041 (gata17-2) which carried an insertion in the LLM-domain-208

encoding gene region (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) Finally we detected no 209

transcript in our analyses of a GATA17L exon insertion allele (gata17l-1 210

Salk_026798) when using primer pairs spanning the insertion or located 211

downstream from the insertion site (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) When analyzing 212

this allele with a primer combination upstream of the insertion we were able 213

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

8

to detect residual transcript in gata17l-1 but judged that this may not give rise 214

to a fully functional protein since the insertion was upstream of the LLM-215

domain (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) We concluded that the expression of the 216

respective GATA genes was absent or at least strongly reduced in alleles for 217

GNC (gnc) GNL (gnl) GATA15 (gata15-2) GATA17 (gata17-2) and 218

GATA17L (gata17l-1) alleles The gata16-1 and gata17-1 alleles were only 219

partially impaired in the expression of the respective genes whereas the 220

gata15-1 allele was not affected in GATA15 expression The gata15-2 and 221

gata17-2 alleles became available to us only later in this study and for 222

strategic reasons could not be included in the generation of the complex 223

mutant combinations described below Any of the phenotypes described in the 224

following sections for the more complex mutant combinations were not 225

apparent in the gata15-2 and gata17-2 single mutants We therefore exclude 226

the possibility that these genes are by themselves responsible for any of the 227

phenotypes described here for the higher order mutants 228

229

LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening We did not observe 230

any obvious defects in the gata single mutants apart from the already well-231

documented defects in greening of the gnc mutants (Bi et al 2005 Richter et 232

al 2010 Chiang et al 2012) To generate higher order mutants in the 233

closely related B-GATA genes we combined the alleles gnc gnl gata15-1 234

gata16-1 gata17-1 and gata17l-1 For simplicity we will subsequently omit 235

the respective allele numbers Since the presence of the misannotated 236

gata15-1 mutation does not provide information about the loss of GATA15 we 237

refer to this allele as GATA15 238

Through genetic crosses we obtained gata17 gata17l double mutants 239

GATA15 gata16 gata17 gata17l gnc gnl GATA15 gata16 and gnc gnl gata17 240

gata17l triple and quadruple mutants as well as a gnc gnl GATA15 gata16 241

gata17 gata17l quintuple mutant In the following we will refer to the gata 242

quintuple mutant as the quintuple mutant and to the GATA15 gata16 gata17 243

gata17l triple mutant that does not include the gnc and gnl alleles as the 244

(complementary) triple mutant In all other cases we will specify the allele 245

combinations 246

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

9

To examine a possible redundant function among the B-GATAs in the control 247

of greening we analyzed greening and chlorophyll content in 14 day-old light-248

grown gata mutant plants (Fig 1D and E) Although there was no indication 249

for a defect in greening in gata17 gata17l or in the triple mutant we found that 250

the greening defect of gnc gnl was further enhanced in the gnc gnl gata17 251

gata17l quadruple mutant and even more in the quintuple mutant (Fig 1D and 252

E) At the same time greening defects were not obvious in any of the gata 253

single mutants (Fig 1E) In the case of the gata15 and gata17 alleles this 254

was not due to the fact that weak alleles had been chosen for the complex 255

mutants since also the severe alleles gata15-2 and gata17-2 showed no 256

reduction in chlorophyll levels when compared to the wild type (Fig 1E) 257

The further reduction in chlorophyll accumulation in the quintuple mutant was 258

also apparent when we analyzed chlorophyll abundance by fluorescence 259

microscopy where we found reduced chloroplast fluorescence when 260

comparing the quintuple mutant to gnc gnl (Fig 1F) Furthermore we noted 261

that the greening defect gradually disappeared in gnc gnl mutants after the 262

seedling stage but remained apparent in the quintuple mutants also in adult 263

plants (Fig S4) Taken together this suggested that all mutated GATA genes 264

participate in the control of greening and chlorophyll accumulation and that 265

the defects of mutants defective in a single gene may be suppressed by the 266

presence of the other family members 267

268

Gene expression regulation of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 269

had been in the focus of several studies based on the strong regulation of 270

their gene expression by light and CK (Bi et al 2005 Naito et al 2007 271

Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) We were therefore interested in 272

evaluating to what extent light and CK regulate the expression of the other 273

GATA genes In the case of light regulation we found that far-red red as well 274

as blue light strongly induced the expression of GNL and to some extent also 275

the expression of GNC (Fig 2) In blue light we noted a subtle but significant 276

induction of GATA15 and GATA16 (Fig 2C) Importantly this regulation was 277

not observed in the red and far-red light receptor mutant phyA phyB or in the 278

blue light receptor mutant cry1 cry2 (Fig 2) Furthermore light-induced gene 279

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

10

expression changes in red light were impaired in the quadruple mutant for the 280

PHYTOCHROME INTERACTING FACTOR (PIF) genes PIF1 PIF3 PIF4 281

and PIF5 (pifq) indicating that the light-dependent regulation in red light was 282

mediated by the phytochrome and PIF signaling pathways (Fig S5) (Leivar et 283

al 2008) 284

The CK experiments indicated that CK induces the expression of all six GATA 285

genes (Fig 3) With an about three-fold increase in transcript abundance this 286

induction was strongest for GNL but could be observed for each of the other 287

GATA genes after a one to four hour CK treatment (Fig 3) Thus CK 288

promotes the expression of all six LLM-domain B-GATAs 289

290

Mutants of LLM-domain B-GATAs are impaired in hypocotyl elongation 291

Due to the strong regulation particularly of GNL but also of GNC in far-red red 292

and blue light conditions we examined the contribution of the GATA genes to 293

hypocotyl elongation by analyzing mutant seedlings in the different light 294

conditions in two different light intensities (Fig 4) Here we found that 295

quintuple mutant seedlings had a shorter hypocotyl than wild type seedlings in 296

white light as well as in red far-red and blue light (Fig 4) Notably these 297

phenotypes were not apparent or at least not significant in the gnc gnl 298

double mutant or the triple mutant suggesting that the respective other GATA 299

genes may contribute to the hypocotyl elongation phenotype in these 300

backgrounds (Fig 4) At the same time hypocotyl length of dark-grown 301

mutant seedlings was indistinguishable in all genotypes from that observed in 302

the wild type (Fig 4E and G) The short hypocotyl phenotype of the GATA 303

gene mutants was also interesting because we previously observed that the 304

LLM-domain B-GATA overexpressors had a longer hypocotyl than the wild 305

type when grown in white light (Behringer et al 2014) When analyzed in the 306

different light conditions we found the long hypocotyl phenotype of the GNL 307

overexpression line (GNLox) was also present in far-red and blue light but 308

interestingly not in red light where hypocotyls were even shorter than in the 309

wild type or the mutants when grown in weak red light conditions (Fig 4) 310

311

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

11

GATA gene mutants have differential gene expression defects The 312

strong induction of GNL gene expression by CK was already repeatedly 313

described and is the reason for the genersquos original designation CGA1 314

(CYTOKININ-INDUCED GATA1) (Naito et al 2007 Kollmer et al 2011) In 315

order to examine the role of the GATA genes in CK-responsive gene 316

expression we performed microarray experiments with 14 day-old wild type 317

plants gnc gnl and triple mutants as well as quintuple mutants treated for 60 318

min with the CK 6-BA (6-benzylaminopurine) or a corresponding mock solvent 319

control (Fig 5 and Fig 6 Supplemental Tables S1 and S2) We then 320

analyzed the resulting data with regard to differences in basal gene 321

expression (Fig 5) and with regard to gene expression differences after the 322

CK treatment in comparison to the mock control (Fig 6) For technical 323

reasons the experiment was conducted in two rounds the first experiment 324

included the Col-0 (1) wild type control the gnc gnl double mutant and the 325

quintuple mutant the second experiment included an independent Col-0 (2) 326

wild type control and the triple mutant When we examined the expression of 327

the CK-induced ARRs (A-TYPE RESPONSE REGULATORS) of the CK 328

signaling pathway we could confirm that the respective CK induction 329

experiments were comparably efficient between the two experiments and in 330

all genotypes tested (Fig S6A) We also examined the microarray dataset 331

with regard to the expression of a previously defined so-called ldquogolden listrdquo of 332

CK-regulated genes (Bhargava et al 2013) Over 70 of the 331 entities 333

derived from this list were significantly CK-regulated in our experiments 334

(Supplemental Table S3) When applying a two-fold expression change as 335

additional filter criterion 71 of these 331 entities were identified as up- (Col-0 336

1 and Col-0 2) and 39 (Col-0 1) and 25 entities (Col-0 2) as down-regulated 337

after CK treatment (Fig S6B and Supplemental Table S3) We thus 338

concluded that the CK treatments in both experiments were similarly efficient 339

and that the data sets could be used for comparative analyses 340

The comparison of the basal gene expression profiles of the wild type 341

samples and the mutants indicated that the (untreated) quintuple mutant 342

seedlings had by far the largest number of differentially regulated genes with 343

4722 down-regulated and 976 up-regulated entities when compared to the 344

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

12

Col-0 (1) wild type (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) Furthermore the gnc 345

gnl double mutant contained 2458 down- and 294 up-regulated entities 346

respectively (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) In comparison the number 347

of differentially expressed genes was comparatively minor in the triple mutant 348

which had only 323 down- and 278 up-regulated entities in this particular 349

experiment and selected physiological growth conditions (Fig 5) 350

The comparatively strong gene expression differences in the gnc gnl double 351

and the quintuple mutants and the fact that both mutants shared the gnc gnl 352

loss-of-function at the genetic level was reflected by the large overlap 353

between the differentially expressed gene sets of the two genotypes 354

Specifically 1922 of the 2458 down-regulated entities from gnc gnl were also 355

down-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 5B) and 98 of the 294 entities 356

up-regulated in gnc gnl were also up-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 357

5B) Conversely the overlap in gene expression defects between the triple 358

mutant and the quintuple mutant was higher than that between the triple 359

mutant and gnc gnl (Fig 5B) We therefore concluded that the gene 360

expression differences between the different GATA gene mutants was 361

strongest in the quintuple mutant and that the strong increase in the number 362

of differentially regulated genes exceeded by far the differences seen in the 363

gnc gnl double mutant and the triple mutant This supported our conclusion 364

from the phenotypic analyses that the GATA genes act in a functionally 365

redundant manner 366

Since we had observed increased gene expression of all six GATA genes 367

after CK-treatment we expected that CK-induced gene expression may be 368

compromised in the gata mutants (Fig 6) Indeed of the 996 entities that 369

were down-regulated after CK-treatment in the wild type (Col-0 1) only 173 370

(18 ) and 89 (9 ) remained CK-regulated in the quintuple and gnc gnl 371

mutant respectively (Fig 6A and Supplemental Table S2) At the same time 372

of the 188 entities that were down-regulated after CK treatment in the wild 373

type sample of the second experiment (Col-0 2) 83 (44 ) remained CK-374

regulated in the gata triple mutant (Fig 6B) The differential effect on gene 375

expression between the different mutants was less pronounced when 376

examining the CK-induced genes Here 49 (quintuple mutant) 59 (gnc 377

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

13

gnl) and 63 (triple mutant) of the CK-induced entities from the respective 378

wild types remained CK-regulated in the mutants (Fig 6A and B) In summary 379

we concluded that CK-regulated gene expression is impaired in the GATA 380

gene mutants 381

382

GATA gene mutants are defective in CK-regulated developmental 383

processes Based on the strong defects of gata mutants in CK-regulated 384

gene expression we searched for phenotypes that could be explained by 385

defects in CK response CK signaling was described as a regulator of 386

phyllotactic patterning in the shoot apical meristem of Arabidopsis (Besnard et 387

al 2014) In line with a role of the LLM-domain B-GATA genes in this process 388

we observed frequent aberrations from normal phyllotactic patterning in flower 389

positioning in triple and quintuple mutant inflorescences (Fig 7) Quantitative 390

analyses revealed aberrations from the canonical angle of ~1375deg in about 391

~30 of the petioles in triple and quintuple inflorescences (Fig 7D) At the 392

same time this patterning defect was not apparent in the gnc gnl double 393

mutant Since we also did not observe a quantitative increase in the severity 394

of this phenotype between the triple and the quintuple mutant we concluded 395

that GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L may be responsible for this phenotype 396

(Fig 7D) 397

Leaf senescence is another CK-regulated process (Hwang et al 2012) In the 398

wild type CK levels are reduced during senescence and positive or negative 399

interference with the decrease in CK levels can promote and delay 400

senescence respectively (Hwang et al 2012) Senescence can be induced 401

by shifting light-grown plants to the dark and we had previously already shown 402

that leaf senescence is delayed in overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-403

GATAs (Behringer et al 2014) To examine possible senescence defects in 404

the gata mutants we floated leaves of wild type and mutant plants in the dark 405

on a mock solution or on a solution containing 005 microM or 01 microM 6-BA (Fig 406

8A ndash F) (Weaver and Amasino 2001) In line with the expectation that the 407

presence of CK in the medium would suppress the senescence process we 408

observed decreased senescence in CK-treated wild type leaves which we 409

quantitatively assessed by measuring chlorophyll levels in the mock- and CK-410

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

14

treated leaves (Fig 8F) Here we found that the effects of the senescence 411

treatment were less efficiently suppressed by CK treatments in the gnc gnl 412

double and in the quintuple mutant than in the wild type or the triple mutant 413

(Fig 8A - F) Similarly we observed a stronger effect on the decreases in 414

chlorophyll and total protein levels in the gnc gnl as well as the quintuple 415

mutant when we transferred light-grown plants for four days to the dark (Fig 416

8G ndash I) As previously reported GNL overexpressing plants (GNLox) had 417

senescence phenotypes that were antagonistic to the ones observed with the 418

mutants (Fig 8) (Behringer et al 2014) In the case of the leaf floating assay 419

CK-treatment had a stronger effect on greening and chlorophyll abundance in 420

GNLox than in the wild type (Fig 8A ndash F) When we transferred plants from 421

the light to the dark GNLox seedlings remained visibly green and did not 422

display the strong decrease in total protein abundance that we observed in 423

the wild type or the GATA gene mutants (Fig 8G ndash I) We thus concluded that 424

GATA gene mutants and overexpressors have antagonistic effects with 425

regard to the regulation of senescence and that GNC and GNL contribute 426

particularly strongly to this phenotype 427

CK induces greening in light-grown seedlings (Kobayashi et al 2012) To 428

examine to what extent CK can induce chlorophyll accumulation in the gata 429

mutants we grew plants for two weeks in constant light on medium containing 430

CK (5 nM BA) or a corresponding CK-free medium As expected chlorophyll 431

content was increased in wild type plants but this increase was neither 432

significant in the gnc gnl nor the triple or the quintuple mutants (Fig S7) We 433

thus concluded that the GATA factors are required for CK-induced greening in 434

Arabidopsis seedlings 435

It was previously reported that hypocotyl elongation could be repressed by 436

incubating dark-grown seedlings in the presence of CK (Su and Howell 1995) 437

Since the GATA gene mutants had displayed a hypocotyl elongation defect in 438

light-grown seedlings (Fig 4) we also explored the link between hypocotyl 439

elongation and CK However when we tested the effects of CK on hypocotyl 440

elongation in dark-grown seedlings we did not detect any significant 441

differences in the response between the different genotypes tested (Fig S8) 442

It is thus unlikely that the GATA genes participate in this elongation response 443

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

15

Branching is another phenotype that has been attributed to defects in CK 444

biosynthesis and response (El-Showk et al 2013) When we analyzed the 445

general habitus of the quintuple mutants we noted that they had an increased 446

number of secondary branches that was combined with a reduced plant 447

height (Fig 9A - C) Occasionally we also observed the outgrowth of 448

inflorescences in the axils of lateral inflorescences in the mutants whereas we 449

had not noted this phenotype in the wild type (Fig 9D and E) A quantitative 450

analysis of these phenotypes over all gata mutant phenotypes revealed that 451

the number of first and second order lateral branches increased with 452

increasing mutant complexity (Fig 9B) Here we observed strong effects 453

already in the gata17 gata17l mutant as well as the gnc gnl double mutant but 454

strongest defects in the triple and the quintuple mutant thus all five GATA 455

genes may contribute to this phenotype (Fig 9B) At the same time plant 456

height was reduced to a significant but still minor level in these mutants 457

suggesting that decreases in plant height which may have indirect 458

consequences on the general plant habitus and branching are not the 459

primary cause for altered branching patterns in the gata mutants (Fig 9C) It 460

is further important to note that the higher order GATA gene mutants initiated 461

fewer vegetative buds but had a higher number of growing buds as reflected 462

by the increased branch numbers (Fig 9F) Thus axillary bud formation is 463

promoted and bud outgrowth is repressed by the GATAs in the wild type 464

Another phenotype that became apparent during our analysis of the gata 465

mutant plant habitus was an increase in the angle formed between the 466

primary inflorescence and the lateral inflorescences (Fig 9G and H Fig S9) 467

gata mutants had a decreased angle formed between the primary 468

inflorescence and lateral inflorescences and this phenotype was strongest in 469

the quintuple mutant and intermediate in the gnc gnl and triple mutants (Fig 470

9G and H Fig S9) Interestingly we had previously observed increased 471

branch angles in GATA overexpression lines such as GNLox (Fig S9) 472

(Behringer et al 2014) We thus concluded that GATA gene mutants and 473

overexpressors antagonistically regulate branch angles in Arabidopsis 474

475

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

16

GATA genes regulate petal and sepal numbers as well as silique length 476

CK signaling has recently been implicated in the control of floral development 477

(Han et al 2014) When we analyzed gata mutant flowers in more detail we 478

noted with interest aberrations in floral organ numbers in comparison to the 479

wild type (Fig 10A) Whereas wild type flowers have generally four sepals 480

and four petals and only rarely deviate from this pattern (in our study in 481

around 2 of the cases) a strong increase in flowers with more than four 482

(generally five in rare cases six) petals and sepals became apparent in the 483

higher order gata mutants (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) In the gata17 gata17l 484

mutants we observed flowers with more than four sepals and petals in 12 of 485

all flowers and this number was slightly enhanced in the triple mutant (13 486

petals) and the quintuple mutant (14 petals) (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) 487

Importantly the single mutants with the clearest apparent effect were the 488

gata17 and gata17l mutants and inversely mutations in GNC and GNL 489

contributed only to a minor extent to this phenotype (Fig S10A) In summary 490

this analysis revealed that GATA17 and GATA17L make a particularly strong 491

contribution to the floral morphology phenotype of the gata mutants 492

Since we had previously noted that overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-493

GATAs have short siliques and a reduced number of seeds per silique we 494

also analyzed silique length and seed set in the gata mutants (Fig S10B - D) 495

In line with an antagonistic regulation of these traits in the gata mutants we 496

measured significant increases in seed set in the siliques of the gnc gnl the 497

triple as well as the quintuple mutants and we detected significant increases 498

in silique length in all mutant backgrounds (Fig S10B - D) We thus concluded 499

that the GATA genes repress silique elongation and seed set in the wild type 500

at least to a minor extent A differential contribution of individual GATAs to 501

these phenotypes could however not be resolved here 502

503

GATA gene mutants have antagonistic effects on flowering time in long 504

and short days Accelerated flowering in plants grown under long-day 505

conditions was another phenotype previously described for gnc gnl mutants 506

(Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) Conversely overexpression of the 507

LLM-domain B-GATAs causes a strong delay in flowering (Richter et al 508

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

17

2010 Richter et al 2013 Behringer et al 2014) To examine the contribution 509

of the other GATA factors to the flowering time phenotype we grew the gata 510

mutant series in long day and short day conditions with a 16 hr and 8 hr light 511

period respectively (Fig 10B and C Fig S11) Interestingly we observed a 512

gradual acceleration of flowering in long day-grown plants that was weakest in 513

the single mutants more pronounced in the double triple quadruple mutants 514

and strongest in the quintuple mutants (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) 515

We thus concluded that all LLM-domain B-GATA genes examined here may 516

contribute to the repression of flowering in long day-grown plants 517

Interestingly the effects of the reduced GATA gene function on flowering time 518

in short day conditions were antagonistic to those observed in long day-grown 519

plants in that the complex GATA gene mutants flowered much later than the 520

wild type or the less complex mutant combinations when flowering was 521

counted in days (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) We thus concluded that 522

the LLM-domain B-GATAs factors regulate flowering time in long and short 523

day conditions but in view of the antagonistic nature of this regulation that 524

their contribution to flowering time control may be complex 525

526

Cross-regulation of GATA gene expression Since several of our genetic 527

analyses had suggested a functional redundancy between the GATA genes 528

we looked for evidences of a cross-regulation of GATA gene expression in the 529

gnc gnl double mutant background There we detected indeed an increased 530

transcript abundance of GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 531

mutant which could be compensatory for the loss of GNC and GNL (Fig 11A) 532

At the same time GATA15 GATA16 and GATA17L gene expression levels 533

were significantly reduced in GNL overexpression lines (GNLox) suggesting 534

that GNL may regulate the expression of these genes 535

Since these observations indicated that molecular mechanisms may exist that 536

compensate for the loss of individual LLM-domain B-GATA genes eg in the 537

gnc gnl mutants we examined the binding of GNL to the LLM-domain GATA 538

gene promoters after ChIP-seq analysis (chromatin immunoprecipitation 539

followed by DNA sequencing) Here we found that at least three of the six 540

LLM-domain B-GATA genes were bound by GNL after immunoprecipitation of 541

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

18

HA-tagged GNL from transgenic plants expressing a functional GNLHA 542

transgene from a GNL promoter fragment in the gnc gnl background 543

(pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl Fig 11B) Through subsequent ChIP-PCR studies 544

targeting selected regions upstream from GNC GNL and GATA17 we could 545

confirm this binding through independent analyses (Fig 11C) Thus LLM-546

domain B-GATA factors may directly regulate their own expression as well as 547

that of other family members 548

549

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

19

DISCUSSION 550

In the present study we have characterized the six-membered family of LLM-551

domain B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Whereas the family has diverged when 552

compared between Arabidopsis tomato barley and Brachypodium a clear 553

conservation of this protein family can be observed within the Brassicaceae 554

family (Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014) Within the Brassicaceae GNC and 555

GNL GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and GATA17L form closely 556

related LLM-domain B-GATA pairs In a previous study we had comparatively 557

analyzed transgenic Arabidopsis lines expressing different members of the 558

LLM-domain B-GATA gene family from Arabidopsis barley and tomato and 559

concluded that these genes are functionally redundant at the biochemical 560

level since their overexpression resulted in highly similar phenotypes 561

(Behringer et al 2014) Several of the phenotypes analyzed here namely 562

greening (Fig 1D-F) hypocotyl elongation (Fig 4) plant height branching 563

patterns (Fig 9) branch angles (Fig 9 and Fig S9) silique length seed set 564

(Fig S10) flowering time (Fig 10) as well as senescence (Fig 8) are 565

strongest in the gata quintuple mutant and weaker or in some cases not even 566

apparent in the less complex gata mutant combinations Thus in line with this 567

previous study our present analysis shows that the LLM-domain B-GATA 568

genes from Arabidopsis have a shared biological function in the control of 569

multiple developmental pathways 570

Due to the high complexity of the available range of single double triple 571

quadruple and quintuple mutants we restricted many of our phenotypic 572

analyses to the gnc gnl double the complementary triple and the quintuple 573

mutants It can nevertheless be suggested based on the presently available 574

data that some phenotypes are predominantly controlled by a single LLM-575

domain B-GATA or rather an LLM-domain B-GATA gene pair Phyllotactic 576

patterning as assessed here in the inflorescence is impaired in the gata triple 577

but not in the gnc gnl double mutant (Fig 7) Similarly the increases in floral 578

organ numbers are already very prominent in the gata17 gata17l double 579

mutants and not much more enhanced in the gata triple or quintuple mutant 580

that includes the gata17 gata17l mutations (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) Thus 581

the LLM-domain B-GATA genes have shared overlapping but also distinct 582

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

20

roles in the control of plant development The fact that GATA15 gene function 583

is not impaired in the selected GATA15 gene insertion allele does not allow us 584

to draw any direct conclusions on the biological function of this gene based on 585

the data presented here Furthermore the fact that the mutant alleles of 586

GATA16 and GATA17 used in the complex mutants are only partially 587

defective in GATA gene expression could suggest that even stronger 588

phenotypes may be observed if loss-of-function alleles were used The two 589

strong alleles for GATA15 (gata15-2) and GATA17 (gata17-2) isolated here 590

but analyzed only as single mutants may help in the future to understand the 591

biological function of these GATA genes at further depth 592

It is interesting that the overexpression lines and the mutants of these GATA 593

genes frequently have antagonistic phenotypes This study in combination 594

with a previous study identifies such antagonistically regulated phenotypes in 595

the control of greening hypocotyl elongation branch angle formation 596

flowering time and senescence (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 597

Particularly in the case of transcription factors where the loss-of-function or 598

overexpression may affect the expression of many downstream targets genes 599

and developmental responses triggered by these target genes one may not 600

expect such a clear antagonistic relationship between mutants with reduced 601

gene functions and the overexpressors In view of the fact that 602

overexpressors likely also control the expression of genes that are normally 603

not targeted by this transcription factor when expressed from their native 604

promoter (off-targets) this observation is even more striking It may suggest 605

that the GATAs examined here control developmental responses in a dosage-606

dependent manner together with other critical factors In this context the 607

presence and abundance of the GATAs would just modulate the response but 608

would by itself not be sufficient to trigger it Further analyses will be required 609

to gain a more detailed understanding of the mode of action of the LLM-610

domain B-GATA factors in the control of gene expression 611

We had previously shown that the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 612

repress flowering since their loss-of-function mutants and overexpressors 613

displayed an early and late flowering phenotype respectively when plants 614

were grown in long-day conditions (Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) 615

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

21

We furthermore showed that the control of flowering is partially mediated by 616

the flowering time regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION 617

OF CONSTANS1) which acts downstream from GNC and GNL and whose 618

promoter can be directly bound by GNC and GNL (Richter et al 2013) In line 619

with these previous observations we show here that the complex GATA gene 620

mutants flower even earlier than the gnc gnl mutant further substantiating our 621

conclusion that LLM-domain B-GATAs are flowering time regulators in 622

Arabidopsis (Fig 10B and Fig S11) Surprisingly the complex gata mutants 623

flowered late when grown in short day conditions and their phenotype was 624

thereby antagonistic to the phenotype observed in long days (Fig 10C and 625

Fig S9) The reason for this antagonistic flowering time behavior remains to 626

be resolved but a complex scenario may be envisioned We also do not want 627

to rule out that physiological parameters become limiting in the induction of 628

flowering in the gata mutants Long term defects as a result of their reduced 629

greening may play a limiting role during the extended growth in short days 630

with short illumination periods that are not limiting when plants are grown in 631

long days 632

Several of our phenotypic analyses suggested that the LLM-domain B-GATAs 633

act in concert to control specific phenotypes The fact that at least some of the 634

phenotypes were most pronounced in the quintuple mutant and not apparent 635

or only weak in the less complex mutants suggests that the LLM-domain B-636

GATAs may cross-regulate their expression and that presence and absence 637

of one GATA could interfere with the abundance of other GATA family 638

members We have analyzed this hypothesis here by examining the 639

expression of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 640

GATA17L in the gnc gnl mutant and in the GNL overexpression line (Fig 11A) 641

In both cases we found the expression of three of the four analyzed genes to 642

be differentially regulated in the two genetic backgrounds suggesting that the 643

GATAs can cross-regulate their gene expression and supporting again the 644

hypothesis that the GATAs have a repressive activity on the transcription of 645

the other GATA genes Further support for such a hypothetical cross-646

regulation came from a ChIP-seq analysis with GNL where we observed a 647

strong binding of GNL when expressed from its own promoter to the three 648

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

4

The Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA family is comprised of GATA15 89

GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L (GATA17-LIKE) as well as GNC (GATA 90

NITRATE-INDUCIBLE CARBON METABOLISM-INVOLVED GATA21 91

hitherto GNC) and GNL (GNC-LIKECYTOKININ-RESPONSIVE GATA 92

FACTOR1 hitherto GNL) (Behringer et al 2014 Behringer and 93

Schwechheimer 2015) Among these the paralogous GNC and GNL are 94

already well characterized with regard to their biological function and their 95

upstream regulation gnc and gnc gnl mutants are defective in greening and 96

chloroplast biogenesis and they germinate and flower slightly earlier than the 97

wild type (Bi et al 2005 Richter et al 2010 Chiang et al 2012 Richter et 98

al 2013) Conversely overexpression of the two GATAs results in a strong 99

increase in chlorophyll accumulation and delayed germination and flowering 100

(Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013 Behringer et al 2014) In addition 101

GNC and GNL overexpression promotes hypocotyl elongation in light-grown 102

seedlings alterations in leaf shape and an increased angle between the 103

primary and lateral inflorescences (Behringer et al 2014) Importantly 104

deletion or mutation of the LLM-domain of GNC or GNL compromises some 105

but not all phenotypes when these deletion or mutant variants are 106

overexpressed in Arabidopsis and the effects of the overexpression 107

transgenes are compared to the effects of the overexpression of the wild type 108

proteins (Behringer et al 2014) The fact that the overexpression of every 109

LLM-domain B-GATA factor tested to date results in highly comparable 110

phenotypes suggested that LLM-domain B-GATAs have conserved 111

biochemical functions (Behringer et al 2014) 112

A range of studies have already addressed the upstream signaling pathways 113

controlling GNC and GNL expression GNC was initially identified as a nitrate-114

inducible gene with an apparent role in the control of greening (Bi et al 2005) 115

GNL was originally identified based on its strong CK- (cytokinin-)regulated 116

gene expression and therefore designated CYTOKININ-RESPONSIVE GATA 117

FACTOR1 (CGA1) (Naito et al 2007) The expression of GNC and GNL is 118

also controlled by the DELLA regulators of the GA (gibberellin) signaling 119

pathway as well as by the light-labile PIFs (PHYTOCHROME INTERACTING 120

FACTORS) of the phytochrome signaling pathway which are themselves 121

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

5

negatively regulated by DELLAs (Richter et al 2010 Leivar and Monte 122

2014) Furthermore the auxin signaling regulators ARF2 (AUXIN RESPONSE 123

FACTOR2) and ARF7 the flowering regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR-OF-124

OVEREXPRESSION-OF-CONSTANS1) as well as the floral development 125

regulators AP3 (APETALA3) and (PI) PISTILLATA have been implicated in 126

GNC and GNL transcription control (Mara and Irish 2008 Richter et al 2010 127

Richter et al 2013 Richter et al 2013) Thus multiple signaling pathways 128

converge on GNC and GNL expression and the two genes control a broad 129

range of developmental responses in plants 130

To date nothing is known about the regulation and biological function of the 131

four Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 132

GATA17L Here we examine the entire LLM-domain B-GATA gene family 133

through the analysis of single gene insertion mutants and a range of mutant 134

combinations These analyses reveal mainly overlapping roles for these B-135

GATAs in the control of previously known B-GATA-regulated processes such 136

as greening hypocotyl elongation flowering time and senescence but they 137

also reveal previously unknown functions of LLM-domain B-GATAs in 138

phyllotactic patterning floral organ initiation and accessory meristem 139

formation Several of these responses may be mediated by CK signaling and 140

CK treatments induce the expression of all six GATA genes CK-induced gene 141

expression is partially compromised in LLM-domain B-GATA mutants 142

suggesting that B-GATA genes play a role in CK responses Furthermore we 143

provide evidence for a cross-regulation of the different LLM-domain B-GATA 144

genes at the transcriptional level 145

146

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

6

RESULTS 147

Evolutionary conservation of the LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 148

Brassicaceae The Arabidopsis thaliana genome encodes six LLM-domain 149

GATA transcription factors namely GNC (AtGATA21) GNL (AtGATA22) as 150

well as GATA15 (AtGATA15) GATA16 (AtGATA16) GATA17 (AtGATA17) 151

and GATA17L (AtGATA17-LIKE) (Behringer et al 2014 Behringer and 152

Schwechheimer 2015) Phylogenetic analyses showed that these proteins 153

can be grouped into three pairs of highly homologous proteins comprised of 154

the with regard to the length of their N-termini long B-GATAs GNC and GNL 155

and the short B-GATAs GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and 156

GATA17L respectively (Fig 1A and B Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014 157

Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) It had previously become apparent 158

that the respective subfamilies of long and short B-GATAs were conserved in 159

different plant species but that gene duplications in individual subfamilies may 160

have led to a differential expansion of these subfamilies in different species 161

(Behringer et al 2014) To gain an insight into the conservation of these 162

GATAs within the family of Brassicaceae we searched for LLM-domain B-163

GATAs in the fully sequenced genomes of Arabidopsis lyrata Capsella 164

rubella Eutrema salsugineum and Brassica rapa We retrieved orthologs for 165

each of the six Arabidopsis B-GATAs within each Brassicaceae species (Fig 166

S1 and Fig S2) Whereas the Arabidopsis lyrata Capsella rubella and 167

Eutrema salsugineum genomes contained exactly one apparent ortholog for 168

each of the six Arabidopsis thaliana genes the Brassica rapa genome known 169

to have undergone hexaploidization followed by genome fractionation 170

retained at least two orthologs each for GNC GNL GATA17 and GATA17L 171

and one ortholog of GATA15 and GATA16 (Fig S1 and Fig S2) (Wang et al 172

2011 Tang et al 2012) In summary we concluded that the six LLM-domain 173

B-GATAs are conserved in the different Brassicaceae examined here and that 174

four members of the gene family were present in multiple copies in Brassica 175

rapa 176

177

Characterization of insertion mutants of the six LLM-domain B-GATA 178

genes All previously published genetic analyses of the LLM-domain B-179

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

7

GATAs genes from Arabidopsis thaliana focused on GNC and GNL 180

(Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) As yet no mutants have been 181

described for the remaining four LLM-domain B-GATAs and their biological 182

function remains elusive We therefore identified homozygous lines of T-DNA 183

insertion mutants for each of the six genes (Fig 1C Fig S3) and 184

subsequently analyzed these lines with regard to the effects of the respective 185

mutations on gene expression using quantitative real time PCR (qRT-PCR) 186

and semi-quantitative PCR (sqRT-PCR) (Fig S3B) The analysis of the gnc 187

allele (Salk_001778) which had already been used in several publications 188

suggested that neither the full-length transcript nor regions downstream from 189

the insertion site were transcribed (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) (Richter et al 2010) 190

(Bi et al 2005) Similarly analyses of the gnl insertion mutant (Salk_003995) 191

using primers spanning the entire transcript or flanking the T-DNA harbored in 192

the intron suggested that the GNL full-length transcript was absent (Fig 1C 193

and Fig S3B) (Bi et al 2005 Richter et al 2010) Although one of the 194

selected GATA15 insertion alleles (gata15-1 SAIL_618_B11) was annotated 195

as an in-gene insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) we found no evidence for a 196

change of GATA15 gene expression in the homozygous insertion line (Fig 1C 197

and Fig S3B) Sequencing of the insertion site then revealed that the 198

insertion was downstream from the genersquos 3-UTR (untranslated region) 199

indicating that the GATA15 gene was intact in SAIL_618_B11 (Fig 1C and 200

Fig S3B) The analysis of a second allele (gata15-2 WiscDsLox471A10) with 201

an exon-insertion revealed a strong down-regulation of GATA15 expression in 202

both RT-PCR analyses (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) In a GATA16 allele with a T-203

DNA insertion in the genersquos 3-UTR (gata16-1 Salk_021471) transcript 204

abundance was partially reduced (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) The abundance of 205

GATA17 was also partially reduced in Salk_101994 (gata17-1) which 206

harbored a T-DNA insertion in the genes 5-UTR and strongly reduced in 207

SALK_049041 (gata17-2) which carried an insertion in the LLM-domain-208

encoding gene region (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) Finally we detected no 209

transcript in our analyses of a GATA17L exon insertion allele (gata17l-1 210

Salk_026798) when using primer pairs spanning the insertion or located 211

downstream from the insertion site (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) When analyzing 212

this allele with a primer combination upstream of the insertion we were able 213

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

8

to detect residual transcript in gata17l-1 but judged that this may not give rise 214

to a fully functional protein since the insertion was upstream of the LLM-215

domain (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) We concluded that the expression of the 216

respective GATA genes was absent or at least strongly reduced in alleles for 217

GNC (gnc) GNL (gnl) GATA15 (gata15-2) GATA17 (gata17-2) and 218

GATA17L (gata17l-1) alleles The gata16-1 and gata17-1 alleles were only 219

partially impaired in the expression of the respective genes whereas the 220

gata15-1 allele was not affected in GATA15 expression The gata15-2 and 221

gata17-2 alleles became available to us only later in this study and for 222

strategic reasons could not be included in the generation of the complex 223

mutant combinations described below Any of the phenotypes described in the 224

following sections for the more complex mutant combinations were not 225

apparent in the gata15-2 and gata17-2 single mutants We therefore exclude 226

the possibility that these genes are by themselves responsible for any of the 227

phenotypes described here for the higher order mutants 228

229

LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening We did not observe 230

any obvious defects in the gata single mutants apart from the already well-231

documented defects in greening of the gnc mutants (Bi et al 2005 Richter et 232

al 2010 Chiang et al 2012) To generate higher order mutants in the 233

closely related B-GATA genes we combined the alleles gnc gnl gata15-1 234

gata16-1 gata17-1 and gata17l-1 For simplicity we will subsequently omit 235

the respective allele numbers Since the presence of the misannotated 236

gata15-1 mutation does not provide information about the loss of GATA15 we 237

refer to this allele as GATA15 238

Through genetic crosses we obtained gata17 gata17l double mutants 239

GATA15 gata16 gata17 gata17l gnc gnl GATA15 gata16 and gnc gnl gata17 240

gata17l triple and quadruple mutants as well as a gnc gnl GATA15 gata16 241

gata17 gata17l quintuple mutant In the following we will refer to the gata 242

quintuple mutant as the quintuple mutant and to the GATA15 gata16 gata17 243

gata17l triple mutant that does not include the gnc and gnl alleles as the 244

(complementary) triple mutant In all other cases we will specify the allele 245

combinations 246

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

9

To examine a possible redundant function among the B-GATAs in the control 247

of greening we analyzed greening and chlorophyll content in 14 day-old light-248

grown gata mutant plants (Fig 1D and E) Although there was no indication 249

for a defect in greening in gata17 gata17l or in the triple mutant we found that 250

the greening defect of gnc gnl was further enhanced in the gnc gnl gata17 251

gata17l quadruple mutant and even more in the quintuple mutant (Fig 1D and 252

E) At the same time greening defects were not obvious in any of the gata 253

single mutants (Fig 1E) In the case of the gata15 and gata17 alleles this 254

was not due to the fact that weak alleles had been chosen for the complex 255

mutants since also the severe alleles gata15-2 and gata17-2 showed no 256

reduction in chlorophyll levels when compared to the wild type (Fig 1E) 257

The further reduction in chlorophyll accumulation in the quintuple mutant was 258

also apparent when we analyzed chlorophyll abundance by fluorescence 259

microscopy where we found reduced chloroplast fluorescence when 260

comparing the quintuple mutant to gnc gnl (Fig 1F) Furthermore we noted 261

that the greening defect gradually disappeared in gnc gnl mutants after the 262

seedling stage but remained apparent in the quintuple mutants also in adult 263

plants (Fig S4) Taken together this suggested that all mutated GATA genes 264

participate in the control of greening and chlorophyll accumulation and that 265

the defects of mutants defective in a single gene may be suppressed by the 266

presence of the other family members 267

268

Gene expression regulation of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 269

had been in the focus of several studies based on the strong regulation of 270

their gene expression by light and CK (Bi et al 2005 Naito et al 2007 271

Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) We were therefore interested in 272

evaluating to what extent light and CK regulate the expression of the other 273

GATA genes In the case of light regulation we found that far-red red as well 274

as blue light strongly induced the expression of GNL and to some extent also 275

the expression of GNC (Fig 2) In blue light we noted a subtle but significant 276

induction of GATA15 and GATA16 (Fig 2C) Importantly this regulation was 277

not observed in the red and far-red light receptor mutant phyA phyB or in the 278

blue light receptor mutant cry1 cry2 (Fig 2) Furthermore light-induced gene 279

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

10

expression changes in red light were impaired in the quadruple mutant for the 280

PHYTOCHROME INTERACTING FACTOR (PIF) genes PIF1 PIF3 PIF4 281

and PIF5 (pifq) indicating that the light-dependent regulation in red light was 282

mediated by the phytochrome and PIF signaling pathways (Fig S5) (Leivar et 283

al 2008) 284

The CK experiments indicated that CK induces the expression of all six GATA 285

genes (Fig 3) With an about three-fold increase in transcript abundance this 286

induction was strongest for GNL but could be observed for each of the other 287

GATA genes after a one to four hour CK treatment (Fig 3) Thus CK 288

promotes the expression of all six LLM-domain B-GATAs 289

290

Mutants of LLM-domain B-GATAs are impaired in hypocotyl elongation 291

Due to the strong regulation particularly of GNL but also of GNC in far-red red 292

and blue light conditions we examined the contribution of the GATA genes to 293

hypocotyl elongation by analyzing mutant seedlings in the different light 294

conditions in two different light intensities (Fig 4) Here we found that 295

quintuple mutant seedlings had a shorter hypocotyl than wild type seedlings in 296

white light as well as in red far-red and blue light (Fig 4) Notably these 297

phenotypes were not apparent or at least not significant in the gnc gnl 298

double mutant or the triple mutant suggesting that the respective other GATA 299

genes may contribute to the hypocotyl elongation phenotype in these 300

backgrounds (Fig 4) At the same time hypocotyl length of dark-grown 301

mutant seedlings was indistinguishable in all genotypes from that observed in 302

the wild type (Fig 4E and G) The short hypocotyl phenotype of the GATA 303

gene mutants was also interesting because we previously observed that the 304

LLM-domain B-GATA overexpressors had a longer hypocotyl than the wild 305

type when grown in white light (Behringer et al 2014) When analyzed in the 306

different light conditions we found the long hypocotyl phenotype of the GNL 307

overexpression line (GNLox) was also present in far-red and blue light but 308

interestingly not in red light where hypocotyls were even shorter than in the 309

wild type or the mutants when grown in weak red light conditions (Fig 4) 310

311

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

11

GATA gene mutants have differential gene expression defects The 312

strong induction of GNL gene expression by CK was already repeatedly 313

described and is the reason for the genersquos original designation CGA1 314

(CYTOKININ-INDUCED GATA1) (Naito et al 2007 Kollmer et al 2011) In 315

order to examine the role of the GATA genes in CK-responsive gene 316

expression we performed microarray experiments with 14 day-old wild type 317

plants gnc gnl and triple mutants as well as quintuple mutants treated for 60 318

min with the CK 6-BA (6-benzylaminopurine) or a corresponding mock solvent 319

control (Fig 5 and Fig 6 Supplemental Tables S1 and S2) We then 320

analyzed the resulting data with regard to differences in basal gene 321

expression (Fig 5) and with regard to gene expression differences after the 322

CK treatment in comparison to the mock control (Fig 6) For technical 323

reasons the experiment was conducted in two rounds the first experiment 324

included the Col-0 (1) wild type control the gnc gnl double mutant and the 325

quintuple mutant the second experiment included an independent Col-0 (2) 326

wild type control and the triple mutant When we examined the expression of 327

the CK-induced ARRs (A-TYPE RESPONSE REGULATORS) of the CK 328

signaling pathway we could confirm that the respective CK induction 329

experiments were comparably efficient between the two experiments and in 330

all genotypes tested (Fig S6A) We also examined the microarray dataset 331

with regard to the expression of a previously defined so-called ldquogolden listrdquo of 332

CK-regulated genes (Bhargava et al 2013) Over 70 of the 331 entities 333

derived from this list were significantly CK-regulated in our experiments 334

(Supplemental Table S3) When applying a two-fold expression change as 335

additional filter criterion 71 of these 331 entities were identified as up- (Col-0 336

1 and Col-0 2) and 39 (Col-0 1) and 25 entities (Col-0 2) as down-regulated 337

after CK treatment (Fig S6B and Supplemental Table S3) We thus 338

concluded that the CK treatments in both experiments were similarly efficient 339

and that the data sets could be used for comparative analyses 340

The comparison of the basal gene expression profiles of the wild type 341

samples and the mutants indicated that the (untreated) quintuple mutant 342

seedlings had by far the largest number of differentially regulated genes with 343

4722 down-regulated and 976 up-regulated entities when compared to the 344

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

12

Col-0 (1) wild type (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) Furthermore the gnc 345

gnl double mutant contained 2458 down- and 294 up-regulated entities 346

respectively (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) In comparison the number 347

of differentially expressed genes was comparatively minor in the triple mutant 348

which had only 323 down- and 278 up-regulated entities in this particular 349

experiment and selected physiological growth conditions (Fig 5) 350

The comparatively strong gene expression differences in the gnc gnl double 351

and the quintuple mutants and the fact that both mutants shared the gnc gnl 352

loss-of-function at the genetic level was reflected by the large overlap 353

between the differentially expressed gene sets of the two genotypes 354

Specifically 1922 of the 2458 down-regulated entities from gnc gnl were also 355

down-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 5B) and 98 of the 294 entities 356

up-regulated in gnc gnl were also up-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 357

5B) Conversely the overlap in gene expression defects between the triple 358

mutant and the quintuple mutant was higher than that between the triple 359

mutant and gnc gnl (Fig 5B) We therefore concluded that the gene 360

expression differences between the different GATA gene mutants was 361

strongest in the quintuple mutant and that the strong increase in the number 362

of differentially regulated genes exceeded by far the differences seen in the 363

gnc gnl double mutant and the triple mutant This supported our conclusion 364

from the phenotypic analyses that the GATA genes act in a functionally 365

redundant manner 366

Since we had observed increased gene expression of all six GATA genes 367

after CK-treatment we expected that CK-induced gene expression may be 368

compromised in the gata mutants (Fig 6) Indeed of the 996 entities that 369

were down-regulated after CK-treatment in the wild type (Col-0 1) only 173 370

(18 ) and 89 (9 ) remained CK-regulated in the quintuple and gnc gnl 371

mutant respectively (Fig 6A and Supplemental Table S2) At the same time 372

of the 188 entities that were down-regulated after CK treatment in the wild 373

type sample of the second experiment (Col-0 2) 83 (44 ) remained CK-374

regulated in the gata triple mutant (Fig 6B) The differential effect on gene 375

expression between the different mutants was less pronounced when 376

examining the CK-induced genes Here 49 (quintuple mutant) 59 (gnc 377

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

13

gnl) and 63 (triple mutant) of the CK-induced entities from the respective 378

wild types remained CK-regulated in the mutants (Fig 6A and B) In summary 379

we concluded that CK-regulated gene expression is impaired in the GATA 380

gene mutants 381

382

GATA gene mutants are defective in CK-regulated developmental 383

processes Based on the strong defects of gata mutants in CK-regulated 384

gene expression we searched for phenotypes that could be explained by 385

defects in CK response CK signaling was described as a regulator of 386

phyllotactic patterning in the shoot apical meristem of Arabidopsis (Besnard et 387

al 2014) In line with a role of the LLM-domain B-GATA genes in this process 388

we observed frequent aberrations from normal phyllotactic patterning in flower 389

positioning in triple and quintuple mutant inflorescences (Fig 7) Quantitative 390

analyses revealed aberrations from the canonical angle of ~1375deg in about 391

~30 of the petioles in triple and quintuple inflorescences (Fig 7D) At the 392

same time this patterning defect was not apparent in the gnc gnl double 393

mutant Since we also did not observe a quantitative increase in the severity 394

of this phenotype between the triple and the quintuple mutant we concluded 395

that GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L may be responsible for this phenotype 396

(Fig 7D) 397

Leaf senescence is another CK-regulated process (Hwang et al 2012) In the 398

wild type CK levels are reduced during senescence and positive or negative 399

interference with the decrease in CK levels can promote and delay 400

senescence respectively (Hwang et al 2012) Senescence can be induced 401

by shifting light-grown plants to the dark and we had previously already shown 402

that leaf senescence is delayed in overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-403

GATAs (Behringer et al 2014) To examine possible senescence defects in 404

the gata mutants we floated leaves of wild type and mutant plants in the dark 405

on a mock solution or on a solution containing 005 microM or 01 microM 6-BA (Fig 406

8A ndash F) (Weaver and Amasino 2001) In line with the expectation that the 407

presence of CK in the medium would suppress the senescence process we 408

observed decreased senescence in CK-treated wild type leaves which we 409

quantitatively assessed by measuring chlorophyll levels in the mock- and CK-410

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

14

treated leaves (Fig 8F) Here we found that the effects of the senescence 411

treatment were less efficiently suppressed by CK treatments in the gnc gnl 412

double and in the quintuple mutant than in the wild type or the triple mutant 413

(Fig 8A - F) Similarly we observed a stronger effect on the decreases in 414

chlorophyll and total protein levels in the gnc gnl as well as the quintuple 415

mutant when we transferred light-grown plants for four days to the dark (Fig 416

8G ndash I) As previously reported GNL overexpressing plants (GNLox) had 417

senescence phenotypes that were antagonistic to the ones observed with the 418

mutants (Fig 8) (Behringer et al 2014) In the case of the leaf floating assay 419

CK-treatment had a stronger effect on greening and chlorophyll abundance in 420

GNLox than in the wild type (Fig 8A ndash F) When we transferred plants from 421

the light to the dark GNLox seedlings remained visibly green and did not 422

display the strong decrease in total protein abundance that we observed in 423

the wild type or the GATA gene mutants (Fig 8G ndash I) We thus concluded that 424

GATA gene mutants and overexpressors have antagonistic effects with 425

regard to the regulation of senescence and that GNC and GNL contribute 426

particularly strongly to this phenotype 427

CK induces greening in light-grown seedlings (Kobayashi et al 2012) To 428

examine to what extent CK can induce chlorophyll accumulation in the gata 429

mutants we grew plants for two weeks in constant light on medium containing 430

CK (5 nM BA) or a corresponding CK-free medium As expected chlorophyll 431

content was increased in wild type plants but this increase was neither 432

significant in the gnc gnl nor the triple or the quintuple mutants (Fig S7) We 433

thus concluded that the GATA factors are required for CK-induced greening in 434

Arabidopsis seedlings 435

It was previously reported that hypocotyl elongation could be repressed by 436

incubating dark-grown seedlings in the presence of CK (Su and Howell 1995) 437

Since the GATA gene mutants had displayed a hypocotyl elongation defect in 438

light-grown seedlings (Fig 4) we also explored the link between hypocotyl 439

elongation and CK However when we tested the effects of CK on hypocotyl 440

elongation in dark-grown seedlings we did not detect any significant 441

differences in the response between the different genotypes tested (Fig S8) 442

It is thus unlikely that the GATA genes participate in this elongation response 443

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

15

Branching is another phenotype that has been attributed to defects in CK 444

biosynthesis and response (El-Showk et al 2013) When we analyzed the 445

general habitus of the quintuple mutants we noted that they had an increased 446

number of secondary branches that was combined with a reduced plant 447

height (Fig 9A - C) Occasionally we also observed the outgrowth of 448

inflorescences in the axils of lateral inflorescences in the mutants whereas we 449

had not noted this phenotype in the wild type (Fig 9D and E) A quantitative 450

analysis of these phenotypes over all gata mutant phenotypes revealed that 451

the number of first and second order lateral branches increased with 452

increasing mutant complexity (Fig 9B) Here we observed strong effects 453

already in the gata17 gata17l mutant as well as the gnc gnl double mutant but 454

strongest defects in the triple and the quintuple mutant thus all five GATA 455

genes may contribute to this phenotype (Fig 9B) At the same time plant 456

height was reduced to a significant but still minor level in these mutants 457

suggesting that decreases in plant height which may have indirect 458

consequences on the general plant habitus and branching are not the 459

primary cause for altered branching patterns in the gata mutants (Fig 9C) It 460

is further important to note that the higher order GATA gene mutants initiated 461

fewer vegetative buds but had a higher number of growing buds as reflected 462

by the increased branch numbers (Fig 9F) Thus axillary bud formation is 463

promoted and bud outgrowth is repressed by the GATAs in the wild type 464

Another phenotype that became apparent during our analysis of the gata 465

mutant plant habitus was an increase in the angle formed between the 466

primary inflorescence and the lateral inflorescences (Fig 9G and H Fig S9) 467

gata mutants had a decreased angle formed between the primary 468

inflorescence and lateral inflorescences and this phenotype was strongest in 469

the quintuple mutant and intermediate in the gnc gnl and triple mutants (Fig 470

9G and H Fig S9) Interestingly we had previously observed increased 471

branch angles in GATA overexpression lines such as GNLox (Fig S9) 472

(Behringer et al 2014) We thus concluded that GATA gene mutants and 473

overexpressors antagonistically regulate branch angles in Arabidopsis 474

475

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

16

GATA genes regulate petal and sepal numbers as well as silique length 476

CK signaling has recently been implicated in the control of floral development 477

(Han et al 2014) When we analyzed gata mutant flowers in more detail we 478

noted with interest aberrations in floral organ numbers in comparison to the 479

wild type (Fig 10A) Whereas wild type flowers have generally four sepals 480

and four petals and only rarely deviate from this pattern (in our study in 481

around 2 of the cases) a strong increase in flowers with more than four 482

(generally five in rare cases six) petals and sepals became apparent in the 483

higher order gata mutants (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) In the gata17 gata17l 484

mutants we observed flowers with more than four sepals and petals in 12 of 485

all flowers and this number was slightly enhanced in the triple mutant (13 486

petals) and the quintuple mutant (14 petals) (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) 487

Importantly the single mutants with the clearest apparent effect were the 488

gata17 and gata17l mutants and inversely mutations in GNC and GNL 489

contributed only to a minor extent to this phenotype (Fig S10A) In summary 490

this analysis revealed that GATA17 and GATA17L make a particularly strong 491

contribution to the floral morphology phenotype of the gata mutants 492

Since we had previously noted that overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-493

GATAs have short siliques and a reduced number of seeds per silique we 494

also analyzed silique length and seed set in the gata mutants (Fig S10B - D) 495

In line with an antagonistic regulation of these traits in the gata mutants we 496

measured significant increases in seed set in the siliques of the gnc gnl the 497

triple as well as the quintuple mutants and we detected significant increases 498

in silique length in all mutant backgrounds (Fig S10B - D) We thus concluded 499

that the GATA genes repress silique elongation and seed set in the wild type 500

at least to a minor extent A differential contribution of individual GATAs to 501

these phenotypes could however not be resolved here 502

503

GATA gene mutants have antagonistic effects on flowering time in long 504

and short days Accelerated flowering in plants grown under long-day 505

conditions was another phenotype previously described for gnc gnl mutants 506

(Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) Conversely overexpression of the 507

LLM-domain B-GATAs causes a strong delay in flowering (Richter et al 508

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

17

2010 Richter et al 2013 Behringer et al 2014) To examine the contribution 509

of the other GATA factors to the flowering time phenotype we grew the gata 510

mutant series in long day and short day conditions with a 16 hr and 8 hr light 511

period respectively (Fig 10B and C Fig S11) Interestingly we observed a 512

gradual acceleration of flowering in long day-grown plants that was weakest in 513

the single mutants more pronounced in the double triple quadruple mutants 514

and strongest in the quintuple mutants (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) 515

We thus concluded that all LLM-domain B-GATA genes examined here may 516

contribute to the repression of flowering in long day-grown plants 517

Interestingly the effects of the reduced GATA gene function on flowering time 518

in short day conditions were antagonistic to those observed in long day-grown 519

plants in that the complex GATA gene mutants flowered much later than the 520

wild type or the less complex mutant combinations when flowering was 521

counted in days (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) We thus concluded that 522

the LLM-domain B-GATAs factors regulate flowering time in long and short 523

day conditions but in view of the antagonistic nature of this regulation that 524

their contribution to flowering time control may be complex 525

526

Cross-regulation of GATA gene expression Since several of our genetic 527

analyses had suggested a functional redundancy between the GATA genes 528

we looked for evidences of a cross-regulation of GATA gene expression in the 529

gnc gnl double mutant background There we detected indeed an increased 530

transcript abundance of GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 531

mutant which could be compensatory for the loss of GNC and GNL (Fig 11A) 532

At the same time GATA15 GATA16 and GATA17L gene expression levels 533

were significantly reduced in GNL overexpression lines (GNLox) suggesting 534

that GNL may regulate the expression of these genes 535

Since these observations indicated that molecular mechanisms may exist that 536

compensate for the loss of individual LLM-domain B-GATA genes eg in the 537

gnc gnl mutants we examined the binding of GNL to the LLM-domain GATA 538

gene promoters after ChIP-seq analysis (chromatin immunoprecipitation 539

followed by DNA sequencing) Here we found that at least three of the six 540

LLM-domain B-GATA genes were bound by GNL after immunoprecipitation of 541

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

18

HA-tagged GNL from transgenic plants expressing a functional GNLHA 542

transgene from a GNL promoter fragment in the gnc gnl background 543

(pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl Fig 11B) Through subsequent ChIP-PCR studies 544

targeting selected regions upstream from GNC GNL and GATA17 we could 545

confirm this binding through independent analyses (Fig 11C) Thus LLM-546

domain B-GATA factors may directly regulate their own expression as well as 547

that of other family members 548

549

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

19

DISCUSSION 550

In the present study we have characterized the six-membered family of LLM-551

domain B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Whereas the family has diverged when 552

compared between Arabidopsis tomato barley and Brachypodium a clear 553

conservation of this protein family can be observed within the Brassicaceae 554

family (Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014) Within the Brassicaceae GNC and 555

GNL GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and GATA17L form closely 556

related LLM-domain B-GATA pairs In a previous study we had comparatively 557

analyzed transgenic Arabidopsis lines expressing different members of the 558

LLM-domain B-GATA gene family from Arabidopsis barley and tomato and 559

concluded that these genes are functionally redundant at the biochemical 560

level since their overexpression resulted in highly similar phenotypes 561

(Behringer et al 2014) Several of the phenotypes analyzed here namely 562

greening (Fig 1D-F) hypocotyl elongation (Fig 4) plant height branching 563

patterns (Fig 9) branch angles (Fig 9 and Fig S9) silique length seed set 564

(Fig S10) flowering time (Fig 10) as well as senescence (Fig 8) are 565

strongest in the gata quintuple mutant and weaker or in some cases not even 566

apparent in the less complex gata mutant combinations Thus in line with this 567

previous study our present analysis shows that the LLM-domain B-GATA 568

genes from Arabidopsis have a shared biological function in the control of 569

multiple developmental pathways 570

Due to the high complexity of the available range of single double triple 571

quadruple and quintuple mutants we restricted many of our phenotypic 572

analyses to the gnc gnl double the complementary triple and the quintuple 573

mutants It can nevertheless be suggested based on the presently available 574

data that some phenotypes are predominantly controlled by a single LLM-575

domain B-GATA or rather an LLM-domain B-GATA gene pair Phyllotactic 576

patterning as assessed here in the inflorescence is impaired in the gata triple 577

but not in the gnc gnl double mutant (Fig 7) Similarly the increases in floral 578

organ numbers are already very prominent in the gata17 gata17l double 579

mutants and not much more enhanced in the gata triple or quintuple mutant 580

that includes the gata17 gata17l mutations (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) Thus 581

the LLM-domain B-GATA genes have shared overlapping but also distinct 582

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

20

roles in the control of plant development The fact that GATA15 gene function 583

is not impaired in the selected GATA15 gene insertion allele does not allow us 584

to draw any direct conclusions on the biological function of this gene based on 585

the data presented here Furthermore the fact that the mutant alleles of 586

GATA16 and GATA17 used in the complex mutants are only partially 587

defective in GATA gene expression could suggest that even stronger 588

phenotypes may be observed if loss-of-function alleles were used The two 589

strong alleles for GATA15 (gata15-2) and GATA17 (gata17-2) isolated here 590

but analyzed only as single mutants may help in the future to understand the 591

biological function of these GATA genes at further depth 592

It is interesting that the overexpression lines and the mutants of these GATA 593

genes frequently have antagonistic phenotypes This study in combination 594

with a previous study identifies such antagonistically regulated phenotypes in 595

the control of greening hypocotyl elongation branch angle formation 596

flowering time and senescence (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 597

Particularly in the case of transcription factors where the loss-of-function or 598

overexpression may affect the expression of many downstream targets genes 599

and developmental responses triggered by these target genes one may not 600

expect such a clear antagonistic relationship between mutants with reduced 601

gene functions and the overexpressors In view of the fact that 602

overexpressors likely also control the expression of genes that are normally 603

not targeted by this transcription factor when expressed from their native 604

promoter (off-targets) this observation is even more striking It may suggest 605

that the GATAs examined here control developmental responses in a dosage-606

dependent manner together with other critical factors In this context the 607

presence and abundance of the GATAs would just modulate the response but 608

would by itself not be sufficient to trigger it Further analyses will be required 609

to gain a more detailed understanding of the mode of action of the LLM-610

domain B-GATA factors in the control of gene expression 611

We had previously shown that the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 612

repress flowering since their loss-of-function mutants and overexpressors 613

displayed an early and late flowering phenotype respectively when plants 614

were grown in long-day conditions (Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) 615

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

21

We furthermore showed that the control of flowering is partially mediated by 616

the flowering time regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION 617

OF CONSTANS1) which acts downstream from GNC and GNL and whose 618

promoter can be directly bound by GNC and GNL (Richter et al 2013) In line 619

with these previous observations we show here that the complex GATA gene 620

mutants flower even earlier than the gnc gnl mutant further substantiating our 621

conclusion that LLM-domain B-GATAs are flowering time regulators in 622

Arabidopsis (Fig 10B and Fig S11) Surprisingly the complex gata mutants 623

flowered late when grown in short day conditions and their phenotype was 624

thereby antagonistic to the phenotype observed in long days (Fig 10C and 625

Fig S9) The reason for this antagonistic flowering time behavior remains to 626

be resolved but a complex scenario may be envisioned We also do not want 627

to rule out that physiological parameters become limiting in the induction of 628

flowering in the gata mutants Long term defects as a result of their reduced 629

greening may play a limiting role during the extended growth in short days 630

with short illumination periods that are not limiting when plants are grown in 631

long days 632

Several of our phenotypic analyses suggested that the LLM-domain B-GATAs 633

act in concert to control specific phenotypes The fact that at least some of the 634

phenotypes were most pronounced in the quintuple mutant and not apparent 635

or only weak in the less complex mutants suggests that the LLM-domain B-636

GATAs may cross-regulate their expression and that presence and absence 637

of one GATA could interfere with the abundance of other GATA family 638

members We have analyzed this hypothesis here by examining the 639

expression of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 640

GATA17L in the gnc gnl mutant and in the GNL overexpression line (Fig 11A) 641

In both cases we found the expression of three of the four analyzed genes to 642

be differentially regulated in the two genetic backgrounds suggesting that the 643

GATAs can cross-regulate their gene expression and supporting again the 644

hypothesis that the GATAs have a repressive activity on the transcription of 645

the other GATA genes Further support for such a hypothetical cross-646

regulation came from a ChIP-seq analysis with GNL where we observed a 647

strong binding of GNL when expressed from its own promoter to the three 648

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

5

negatively regulated by DELLAs (Richter et al 2010 Leivar and Monte 122

2014) Furthermore the auxin signaling regulators ARF2 (AUXIN RESPONSE 123

FACTOR2) and ARF7 the flowering regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR-OF-124

OVEREXPRESSION-OF-CONSTANS1) as well as the floral development 125

regulators AP3 (APETALA3) and (PI) PISTILLATA have been implicated in 126

GNC and GNL transcription control (Mara and Irish 2008 Richter et al 2010 127

Richter et al 2013 Richter et al 2013) Thus multiple signaling pathways 128

converge on GNC and GNL expression and the two genes control a broad 129

range of developmental responses in plants 130

To date nothing is known about the regulation and biological function of the 131

four Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 132

GATA17L Here we examine the entire LLM-domain B-GATA gene family 133

through the analysis of single gene insertion mutants and a range of mutant 134

combinations These analyses reveal mainly overlapping roles for these B-135

GATAs in the control of previously known B-GATA-regulated processes such 136

as greening hypocotyl elongation flowering time and senescence but they 137

also reveal previously unknown functions of LLM-domain B-GATAs in 138

phyllotactic patterning floral organ initiation and accessory meristem 139

formation Several of these responses may be mediated by CK signaling and 140

CK treatments induce the expression of all six GATA genes CK-induced gene 141

expression is partially compromised in LLM-domain B-GATA mutants 142

suggesting that B-GATA genes play a role in CK responses Furthermore we 143

provide evidence for a cross-regulation of the different LLM-domain B-GATA 144

genes at the transcriptional level 145

146

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

6

RESULTS 147

Evolutionary conservation of the LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 148

Brassicaceae The Arabidopsis thaliana genome encodes six LLM-domain 149

GATA transcription factors namely GNC (AtGATA21) GNL (AtGATA22) as 150

well as GATA15 (AtGATA15) GATA16 (AtGATA16) GATA17 (AtGATA17) 151

and GATA17L (AtGATA17-LIKE) (Behringer et al 2014 Behringer and 152

Schwechheimer 2015) Phylogenetic analyses showed that these proteins 153

can be grouped into three pairs of highly homologous proteins comprised of 154

the with regard to the length of their N-termini long B-GATAs GNC and GNL 155

and the short B-GATAs GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and 156

GATA17L respectively (Fig 1A and B Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014 157

Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) It had previously become apparent 158

that the respective subfamilies of long and short B-GATAs were conserved in 159

different plant species but that gene duplications in individual subfamilies may 160

have led to a differential expansion of these subfamilies in different species 161

(Behringer et al 2014) To gain an insight into the conservation of these 162

GATAs within the family of Brassicaceae we searched for LLM-domain B-163

GATAs in the fully sequenced genomes of Arabidopsis lyrata Capsella 164

rubella Eutrema salsugineum and Brassica rapa We retrieved orthologs for 165

each of the six Arabidopsis B-GATAs within each Brassicaceae species (Fig 166

S1 and Fig S2) Whereas the Arabidopsis lyrata Capsella rubella and 167

Eutrema salsugineum genomes contained exactly one apparent ortholog for 168

each of the six Arabidopsis thaliana genes the Brassica rapa genome known 169

to have undergone hexaploidization followed by genome fractionation 170

retained at least two orthologs each for GNC GNL GATA17 and GATA17L 171

and one ortholog of GATA15 and GATA16 (Fig S1 and Fig S2) (Wang et al 172

2011 Tang et al 2012) In summary we concluded that the six LLM-domain 173

B-GATAs are conserved in the different Brassicaceae examined here and that 174

four members of the gene family were present in multiple copies in Brassica 175

rapa 176

177

Characterization of insertion mutants of the six LLM-domain B-GATA 178

genes All previously published genetic analyses of the LLM-domain B-179

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

7

GATAs genes from Arabidopsis thaliana focused on GNC and GNL 180

(Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) As yet no mutants have been 181

described for the remaining four LLM-domain B-GATAs and their biological 182

function remains elusive We therefore identified homozygous lines of T-DNA 183

insertion mutants for each of the six genes (Fig 1C Fig S3) and 184

subsequently analyzed these lines with regard to the effects of the respective 185

mutations on gene expression using quantitative real time PCR (qRT-PCR) 186

and semi-quantitative PCR (sqRT-PCR) (Fig S3B) The analysis of the gnc 187

allele (Salk_001778) which had already been used in several publications 188

suggested that neither the full-length transcript nor regions downstream from 189

the insertion site were transcribed (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) (Richter et al 2010) 190

(Bi et al 2005) Similarly analyses of the gnl insertion mutant (Salk_003995) 191

using primers spanning the entire transcript or flanking the T-DNA harbored in 192

the intron suggested that the GNL full-length transcript was absent (Fig 1C 193

and Fig S3B) (Bi et al 2005 Richter et al 2010) Although one of the 194

selected GATA15 insertion alleles (gata15-1 SAIL_618_B11) was annotated 195

as an in-gene insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) we found no evidence for a 196

change of GATA15 gene expression in the homozygous insertion line (Fig 1C 197

and Fig S3B) Sequencing of the insertion site then revealed that the 198

insertion was downstream from the genersquos 3-UTR (untranslated region) 199

indicating that the GATA15 gene was intact in SAIL_618_B11 (Fig 1C and 200

Fig S3B) The analysis of a second allele (gata15-2 WiscDsLox471A10) with 201

an exon-insertion revealed a strong down-regulation of GATA15 expression in 202

both RT-PCR analyses (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) In a GATA16 allele with a T-203

DNA insertion in the genersquos 3-UTR (gata16-1 Salk_021471) transcript 204

abundance was partially reduced (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) The abundance of 205

GATA17 was also partially reduced in Salk_101994 (gata17-1) which 206

harbored a T-DNA insertion in the genes 5-UTR and strongly reduced in 207

SALK_049041 (gata17-2) which carried an insertion in the LLM-domain-208

encoding gene region (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) Finally we detected no 209

transcript in our analyses of a GATA17L exon insertion allele (gata17l-1 210

Salk_026798) when using primer pairs spanning the insertion or located 211

downstream from the insertion site (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) When analyzing 212

this allele with a primer combination upstream of the insertion we were able 213

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

8

to detect residual transcript in gata17l-1 but judged that this may not give rise 214

to a fully functional protein since the insertion was upstream of the LLM-215

domain (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) We concluded that the expression of the 216

respective GATA genes was absent or at least strongly reduced in alleles for 217

GNC (gnc) GNL (gnl) GATA15 (gata15-2) GATA17 (gata17-2) and 218

GATA17L (gata17l-1) alleles The gata16-1 and gata17-1 alleles were only 219

partially impaired in the expression of the respective genes whereas the 220

gata15-1 allele was not affected in GATA15 expression The gata15-2 and 221

gata17-2 alleles became available to us only later in this study and for 222

strategic reasons could not be included in the generation of the complex 223

mutant combinations described below Any of the phenotypes described in the 224

following sections for the more complex mutant combinations were not 225

apparent in the gata15-2 and gata17-2 single mutants We therefore exclude 226

the possibility that these genes are by themselves responsible for any of the 227

phenotypes described here for the higher order mutants 228

229

LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening We did not observe 230

any obvious defects in the gata single mutants apart from the already well-231

documented defects in greening of the gnc mutants (Bi et al 2005 Richter et 232

al 2010 Chiang et al 2012) To generate higher order mutants in the 233

closely related B-GATA genes we combined the alleles gnc gnl gata15-1 234

gata16-1 gata17-1 and gata17l-1 For simplicity we will subsequently omit 235

the respective allele numbers Since the presence of the misannotated 236

gata15-1 mutation does not provide information about the loss of GATA15 we 237

refer to this allele as GATA15 238

Through genetic crosses we obtained gata17 gata17l double mutants 239

GATA15 gata16 gata17 gata17l gnc gnl GATA15 gata16 and gnc gnl gata17 240

gata17l triple and quadruple mutants as well as a gnc gnl GATA15 gata16 241

gata17 gata17l quintuple mutant In the following we will refer to the gata 242

quintuple mutant as the quintuple mutant and to the GATA15 gata16 gata17 243

gata17l triple mutant that does not include the gnc and gnl alleles as the 244

(complementary) triple mutant In all other cases we will specify the allele 245

combinations 246

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

9

To examine a possible redundant function among the B-GATAs in the control 247

of greening we analyzed greening and chlorophyll content in 14 day-old light-248

grown gata mutant plants (Fig 1D and E) Although there was no indication 249

for a defect in greening in gata17 gata17l or in the triple mutant we found that 250

the greening defect of gnc gnl was further enhanced in the gnc gnl gata17 251

gata17l quadruple mutant and even more in the quintuple mutant (Fig 1D and 252

E) At the same time greening defects were not obvious in any of the gata 253

single mutants (Fig 1E) In the case of the gata15 and gata17 alleles this 254

was not due to the fact that weak alleles had been chosen for the complex 255

mutants since also the severe alleles gata15-2 and gata17-2 showed no 256

reduction in chlorophyll levels when compared to the wild type (Fig 1E) 257

The further reduction in chlorophyll accumulation in the quintuple mutant was 258

also apparent when we analyzed chlorophyll abundance by fluorescence 259

microscopy where we found reduced chloroplast fluorescence when 260

comparing the quintuple mutant to gnc gnl (Fig 1F) Furthermore we noted 261

that the greening defect gradually disappeared in gnc gnl mutants after the 262

seedling stage but remained apparent in the quintuple mutants also in adult 263

plants (Fig S4) Taken together this suggested that all mutated GATA genes 264

participate in the control of greening and chlorophyll accumulation and that 265

the defects of mutants defective in a single gene may be suppressed by the 266

presence of the other family members 267

268

Gene expression regulation of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 269

had been in the focus of several studies based on the strong regulation of 270

their gene expression by light and CK (Bi et al 2005 Naito et al 2007 271

Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) We were therefore interested in 272

evaluating to what extent light and CK regulate the expression of the other 273

GATA genes In the case of light regulation we found that far-red red as well 274

as blue light strongly induced the expression of GNL and to some extent also 275

the expression of GNC (Fig 2) In blue light we noted a subtle but significant 276

induction of GATA15 and GATA16 (Fig 2C) Importantly this regulation was 277

not observed in the red and far-red light receptor mutant phyA phyB or in the 278

blue light receptor mutant cry1 cry2 (Fig 2) Furthermore light-induced gene 279

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

10

expression changes in red light were impaired in the quadruple mutant for the 280

PHYTOCHROME INTERACTING FACTOR (PIF) genes PIF1 PIF3 PIF4 281

and PIF5 (pifq) indicating that the light-dependent regulation in red light was 282

mediated by the phytochrome and PIF signaling pathways (Fig S5) (Leivar et 283

al 2008) 284

The CK experiments indicated that CK induces the expression of all six GATA 285

genes (Fig 3) With an about three-fold increase in transcript abundance this 286

induction was strongest for GNL but could be observed for each of the other 287

GATA genes after a one to four hour CK treatment (Fig 3) Thus CK 288

promotes the expression of all six LLM-domain B-GATAs 289

290

Mutants of LLM-domain B-GATAs are impaired in hypocotyl elongation 291

Due to the strong regulation particularly of GNL but also of GNC in far-red red 292

and blue light conditions we examined the contribution of the GATA genes to 293

hypocotyl elongation by analyzing mutant seedlings in the different light 294

conditions in two different light intensities (Fig 4) Here we found that 295

quintuple mutant seedlings had a shorter hypocotyl than wild type seedlings in 296

white light as well as in red far-red and blue light (Fig 4) Notably these 297

phenotypes were not apparent or at least not significant in the gnc gnl 298

double mutant or the triple mutant suggesting that the respective other GATA 299

genes may contribute to the hypocotyl elongation phenotype in these 300

backgrounds (Fig 4) At the same time hypocotyl length of dark-grown 301

mutant seedlings was indistinguishable in all genotypes from that observed in 302

the wild type (Fig 4E and G) The short hypocotyl phenotype of the GATA 303

gene mutants was also interesting because we previously observed that the 304

LLM-domain B-GATA overexpressors had a longer hypocotyl than the wild 305

type when grown in white light (Behringer et al 2014) When analyzed in the 306

different light conditions we found the long hypocotyl phenotype of the GNL 307

overexpression line (GNLox) was also present in far-red and blue light but 308

interestingly not in red light where hypocotyls were even shorter than in the 309

wild type or the mutants when grown in weak red light conditions (Fig 4) 310

311

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

11

GATA gene mutants have differential gene expression defects The 312

strong induction of GNL gene expression by CK was already repeatedly 313

described and is the reason for the genersquos original designation CGA1 314

(CYTOKININ-INDUCED GATA1) (Naito et al 2007 Kollmer et al 2011) In 315

order to examine the role of the GATA genes in CK-responsive gene 316

expression we performed microarray experiments with 14 day-old wild type 317

plants gnc gnl and triple mutants as well as quintuple mutants treated for 60 318

min with the CK 6-BA (6-benzylaminopurine) or a corresponding mock solvent 319

control (Fig 5 and Fig 6 Supplemental Tables S1 and S2) We then 320

analyzed the resulting data with regard to differences in basal gene 321

expression (Fig 5) and with regard to gene expression differences after the 322

CK treatment in comparison to the mock control (Fig 6) For technical 323

reasons the experiment was conducted in two rounds the first experiment 324

included the Col-0 (1) wild type control the gnc gnl double mutant and the 325

quintuple mutant the second experiment included an independent Col-0 (2) 326

wild type control and the triple mutant When we examined the expression of 327

the CK-induced ARRs (A-TYPE RESPONSE REGULATORS) of the CK 328

signaling pathway we could confirm that the respective CK induction 329

experiments were comparably efficient between the two experiments and in 330

all genotypes tested (Fig S6A) We also examined the microarray dataset 331

with regard to the expression of a previously defined so-called ldquogolden listrdquo of 332

CK-regulated genes (Bhargava et al 2013) Over 70 of the 331 entities 333

derived from this list were significantly CK-regulated in our experiments 334

(Supplemental Table S3) When applying a two-fold expression change as 335

additional filter criterion 71 of these 331 entities were identified as up- (Col-0 336

1 and Col-0 2) and 39 (Col-0 1) and 25 entities (Col-0 2) as down-regulated 337

after CK treatment (Fig S6B and Supplemental Table S3) We thus 338

concluded that the CK treatments in both experiments were similarly efficient 339

and that the data sets could be used for comparative analyses 340

The comparison of the basal gene expression profiles of the wild type 341

samples and the mutants indicated that the (untreated) quintuple mutant 342

seedlings had by far the largest number of differentially regulated genes with 343

4722 down-regulated and 976 up-regulated entities when compared to the 344

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

12

Col-0 (1) wild type (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) Furthermore the gnc 345

gnl double mutant contained 2458 down- and 294 up-regulated entities 346

respectively (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) In comparison the number 347

of differentially expressed genes was comparatively minor in the triple mutant 348

which had only 323 down- and 278 up-regulated entities in this particular 349

experiment and selected physiological growth conditions (Fig 5) 350

The comparatively strong gene expression differences in the gnc gnl double 351

and the quintuple mutants and the fact that both mutants shared the gnc gnl 352

loss-of-function at the genetic level was reflected by the large overlap 353

between the differentially expressed gene sets of the two genotypes 354

Specifically 1922 of the 2458 down-regulated entities from gnc gnl were also 355

down-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 5B) and 98 of the 294 entities 356

up-regulated in gnc gnl were also up-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 357

5B) Conversely the overlap in gene expression defects between the triple 358

mutant and the quintuple mutant was higher than that between the triple 359

mutant and gnc gnl (Fig 5B) We therefore concluded that the gene 360

expression differences between the different GATA gene mutants was 361

strongest in the quintuple mutant and that the strong increase in the number 362

of differentially regulated genes exceeded by far the differences seen in the 363

gnc gnl double mutant and the triple mutant This supported our conclusion 364

from the phenotypic analyses that the GATA genes act in a functionally 365

redundant manner 366

Since we had observed increased gene expression of all six GATA genes 367

after CK-treatment we expected that CK-induced gene expression may be 368

compromised in the gata mutants (Fig 6) Indeed of the 996 entities that 369

were down-regulated after CK-treatment in the wild type (Col-0 1) only 173 370

(18 ) and 89 (9 ) remained CK-regulated in the quintuple and gnc gnl 371

mutant respectively (Fig 6A and Supplemental Table S2) At the same time 372

of the 188 entities that were down-regulated after CK treatment in the wild 373

type sample of the second experiment (Col-0 2) 83 (44 ) remained CK-374

regulated in the gata triple mutant (Fig 6B) The differential effect on gene 375

expression between the different mutants was less pronounced when 376

examining the CK-induced genes Here 49 (quintuple mutant) 59 (gnc 377

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

13

gnl) and 63 (triple mutant) of the CK-induced entities from the respective 378

wild types remained CK-regulated in the mutants (Fig 6A and B) In summary 379

we concluded that CK-regulated gene expression is impaired in the GATA 380

gene mutants 381

382

GATA gene mutants are defective in CK-regulated developmental 383

processes Based on the strong defects of gata mutants in CK-regulated 384

gene expression we searched for phenotypes that could be explained by 385

defects in CK response CK signaling was described as a regulator of 386

phyllotactic patterning in the shoot apical meristem of Arabidopsis (Besnard et 387

al 2014) In line with a role of the LLM-domain B-GATA genes in this process 388

we observed frequent aberrations from normal phyllotactic patterning in flower 389

positioning in triple and quintuple mutant inflorescences (Fig 7) Quantitative 390

analyses revealed aberrations from the canonical angle of ~1375deg in about 391

~30 of the petioles in triple and quintuple inflorescences (Fig 7D) At the 392

same time this patterning defect was not apparent in the gnc gnl double 393

mutant Since we also did not observe a quantitative increase in the severity 394

of this phenotype between the triple and the quintuple mutant we concluded 395

that GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L may be responsible for this phenotype 396

(Fig 7D) 397

Leaf senescence is another CK-regulated process (Hwang et al 2012) In the 398

wild type CK levels are reduced during senescence and positive or negative 399

interference with the decrease in CK levels can promote and delay 400

senescence respectively (Hwang et al 2012) Senescence can be induced 401

by shifting light-grown plants to the dark and we had previously already shown 402

that leaf senescence is delayed in overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-403

GATAs (Behringer et al 2014) To examine possible senescence defects in 404

the gata mutants we floated leaves of wild type and mutant plants in the dark 405

on a mock solution or on a solution containing 005 microM or 01 microM 6-BA (Fig 406

8A ndash F) (Weaver and Amasino 2001) In line with the expectation that the 407

presence of CK in the medium would suppress the senescence process we 408

observed decreased senescence in CK-treated wild type leaves which we 409

quantitatively assessed by measuring chlorophyll levels in the mock- and CK-410

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

14

treated leaves (Fig 8F) Here we found that the effects of the senescence 411

treatment were less efficiently suppressed by CK treatments in the gnc gnl 412

double and in the quintuple mutant than in the wild type or the triple mutant 413

(Fig 8A - F) Similarly we observed a stronger effect on the decreases in 414

chlorophyll and total protein levels in the gnc gnl as well as the quintuple 415

mutant when we transferred light-grown plants for four days to the dark (Fig 416

8G ndash I) As previously reported GNL overexpressing plants (GNLox) had 417

senescence phenotypes that were antagonistic to the ones observed with the 418

mutants (Fig 8) (Behringer et al 2014) In the case of the leaf floating assay 419

CK-treatment had a stronger effect on greening and chlorophyll abundance in 420

GNLox than in the wild type (Fig 8A ndash F) When we transferred plants from 421

the light to the dark GNLox seedlings remained visibly green and did not 422

display the strong decrease in total protein abundance that we observed in 423

the wild type or the GATA gene mutants (Fig 8G ndash I) We thus concluded that 424

GATA gene mutants and overexpressors have antagonistic effects with 425

regard to the regulation of senescence and that GNC and GNL contribute 426

particularly strongly to this phenotype 427

CK induces greening in light-grown seedlings (Kobayashi et al 2012) To 428

examine to what extent CK can induce chlorophyll accumulation in the gata 429

mutants we grew plants for two weeks in constant light on medium containing 430

CK (5 nM BA) or a corresponding CK-free medium As expected chlorophyll 431

content was increased in wild type plants but this increase was neither 432

significant in the gnc gnl nor the triple or the quintuple mutants (Fig S7) We 433

thus concluded that the GATA factors are required for CK-induced greening in 434

Arabidopsis seedlings 435

It was previously reported that hypocotyl elongation could be repressed by 436

incubating dark-grown seedlings in the presence of CK (Su and Howell 1995) 437

Since the GATA gene mutants had displayed a hypocotyl elongation defect in 438

light-grown seedlings (Fig 4) we also explored the link between hypocotyl 439

elongation and CK However when we tested the effects of CK on hypocotyl 440

elongation in dark-grown seedlings we did not detect any significant 441

differences in the response between the different genotypes tested (Fig S8) 442

It is thus unlikely that the GATA genes participate in this elongation response 443

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

15

Branching is another phenotype that has been attributed to defects in CK 444

biosynthesis and response (El-Showk et al 2013) When we analyzed the 445

general habitus of the quintuple mutants we noted that they had an increased 446

number of secondary branches that was combined with a reduced plant 447

height (Fig 9A - C) Occasionally we also observed the outgrowth of 448

inflorescences in the axils of lateral inflorescences in the mutants whereas we 449

had not noted this phenotype in the wild type (Fig 9D and E) A quantitative 450

analysis of these phenotypes over all gata mutant phenotypes revealed that 451

the number of first and second order lateral branches increased with 452

increasing mutant complexity (Fig 9B) Here we observed strong effects 453

already in the gata17 gata17l mutant as well as the gnc gnl double mutant but 454

strongest defects in the triple and the quintuple mutant thus all five GATA 455

genes may contribute to this phenotype (Fig 9B) At the same time plant 456

height was reduced to a significant but still minor level in these mutants 457

suggesting that decreases in plant height which may have indirect 458

consequences on the general plant habitus and branching are not the 459

primary cause for altered branching patterns in the gata mutants (Fig 9C) It 460

is further important to note that the higher order GATA gene mutants initiated 461

fewer vegetative buds but had a higher number of growing buds as reflected 462

by the increased branch numbers (Fig 9F) Thus axillary bud formation is 463

promoted and bud outgrowth is repressed by the GATAs in the wild type 464

Another phenotype that became apparent during our analysis of the gata 465

mutant plant habitus was an increase in the angle formed between the 466

primary inflorescence and the lateral inflorescences (Fig 9G and H Fig S9) 467

gata mutants had a decreased angle formed between the primary 468

inflorescence and lateral inflorescences and this phenotype was strongest in 469

the quintuple mutant and intermediate in the gnc gnl and triple mutants (Fig 470

9G and H Fig S9) Interestingly we had previously observed increased 471

branch angles in GATA overexpression lines such as GNLox (Fig S9) 472

(Behringer et al 2014) We thus concluded that GATA gene mutants and 473

overexpressors antagonistically regulate branch angles in Arabidopsis 474

475

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

16

GATA genes regulate petal and sepal numbers as well as silique length 476

CK signaling has recently been implicated in the control of floral development 477

(Han et al 2014) When we analyzed gata mutant flowers in more detail we 478

noted with interest aberrations in floral organ numbers in comparison to the 479

wild type (Fig 10A) Whereas wild type flowers have generally four sepals 480

and four petals and only rarely deviate from this pattern (in our study in 481

around 2 of the cases) a strong increase in flowers with more than four 482

(generally five in rare cases six) petals and sepals became apparent in the 483

higher order gata mutants (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) In the gata17 gata17l 484

mutants we observed flowers with more than four sepals and petals in 12 of 485

all flowers and this number was slightly enhanced in the triple mutant (13 486

petals) and the quintuple mutant (14 petals) (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) 487

Importantly the single mutants with the clearest apparent effect were the 488

gata17 and gata17l mutants and inversely mutations in GNC and GNL 489

contributed only to a minor extent to this phenotype (Fig S10A) In summary 490

this analysis revealed that GATA17 and GATA17L make a particularly strong 491

contribution to the floral morphology phenotype of the gata mutants 492

Since we had previously noted that overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-493

GATAs have short siliques and a reduced number of seeds per silique we 494

also analyzed silique length and seed set in the gata mutants (Fig S10B - D) 495

In line with an antagonistic regulation of these traits in the gata mutants we 496

measured significant increases in seed set in the siliques of the gnc gnl the 497

triple as well as the quintuple mutants and we detected significant increases 498

in silique length in all mutant backgrounds (Fig S10B - D) We thus concluded 499

that the GATA genes repress silique elongation and seed set in the wild type 500

at least to a minor extent A differential contribution of individual GATAs to 501

these phenotypes could however not be resolved here 502

503

GATA gene mutants have antagonistic effects on flowering time in long 504

and short days Accelerated flowering in plants grown under long-day 505

conditions was another phenotype previously described for gnc gnl mutants 506

(Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) Conversely overexpression of the 507

LLM-domain B-GATAs causes a strong delay in flowering (Richter et al 508

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

17

2010 Richter et al 2013 Behringer et al 2014) To examine the contribution 509

of the other GATA factors to the flowering time phenotype we grew the gata 510

mutant series in long day and short day conditions with a 16 hr and 8 hr light 511

period respectively (Fig 10B and C Fig S11) Interestingly we observed a 512

gradual acceleration of flowering in long day-grown plants that was weakest in 513

the single mutants more pronounced in the double triple quadruple mutants 514

and strongest in the quintuple mutants (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) 515

We thus concluded that all LLM-domain B-GATA genes examined here may 516

contribute to the repression of flowering in long day-grown plants 517

Interestingly the effects of the reduced GATA gene function on flowering time 518

in short day conditions were antagonistic to those observed in long day-grown 519

plants in that the complex GATA gene mutants flowered much later than the 520

wild type or the less complex mutant combinations when flowering was 521

counted in days (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) We thus concluded that 522

the LLM-domain B-GATAs factors regulate flowering time in long and short 523

day conditions but in view of the antagonistic nature of this regulation that 524

their contribution to flowering time control may be complex 525

526

Cross-regulation of GATA gene expression Since several of our genetic 527

analyses had suggested a functional redundancy between the GATA genes 528

we looked for evidences of a cross-regulation of GATA gene expression in the 529

gnc gnl double mutant background There we detected indeed an increased 530

transcript abundance of GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 531

mutant which could be compensatory for the loss of GNC and GNL (Fig 11A) 532

At the same time GATA15 GATA16 and GATA17L gene expression levels 533

were significantly reduced in GNL overexpression lines (GNLox) suggesting 534

that GNL may regulate the expression of these genes 535

Since these observations indicated that molecular mechanisms may exist that 536

compensate for the loss of individual LLM-domain B-GATA genes eg in the 537

gnc gnl mutants we examined the binding of GNL to the LLM-domain GATA 538

gene promoters after ChIP-seq analysis (chromatin immunoprecipitation 539

followed by DNA sequencing) Here we found that at least three of the six 540

LLM-domain B-GATA genes were bound by GNL after immunoprecipitation of 541

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

18

HA-tagged GNL from transgenic plants expressing a functional GNLHA 542

transgene from a GNL promoter fragment in the gnc gnl background 543

(pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl Fig 11B) Through subsequent ChIP-PCR studies 544

targeting selected regions upstream from GNC GNL and GATA17 we could 545

confirm this binding through independent analyses (Fig 11C) Thus LLM-546

domain B-GATA factors may directly regulate their own expression as well as 547

that of other family members 548

549

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

19

DISCUSSION 550

In the present study we have characterized the six-membered family of LLM-551

domain B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Whereas the family has diverged when 552

compared between Arabidopsis tomato barley and Brachypodium a clear 553

conservation of this protein family can be observed within the Brassicaceae 554

family (Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014) Within the Brassicaceae GNC and 555

GNL GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and GATA17L form closely 556

related LLM-domain B-GATA pairs In a previous study we had comparatively 557

analyzed transgenic Arabidopsis lines expressing different members of the 558

LLM-domain B-GATA gene family from Arabidopsis barley and tomato and 559

concluded that these genes are functionally redundant at the biochemical 560

level since their overexpression resulted in highly similar phenotypes 561

(Behringer et al 2014) Several of the phenotypes analyzed here namely 562

greening (Fig 1D-F) hypocotyl elongation (Fig 4) plant height branching 563

patterns (Fig 9) branch angles (Fig 9 and Fig S9) silique length seed set 564

(Fig S10) flowering time (Fig 10) as well as senescence (Fig 8) are 565

strongest in the gata quintuple mutant and weaker or in some cases not even 566

apparent in the less complex gata mutant combinations Thus in line with this 567

previous study our present analysis shows that the LLM-domain B-GATA 568

genes from Arabidopsis have a shared biological function in the control of 569

multiple developmental pathways 570

Due to the high complexity of the available range of single double triple 571

quadruple and quintuple mutants we restricted many of our phenotypic 572

analyses to the gnc gnl double the complementary triple and the quintuple 573

mutants It can nevertheless be suggested based on the presently available 574

data that some phenotypes are predominantly controlled by a single LLM-575

domain B-GATA or rather an LLM-domain B-GATA gene pair Phyllotactic 576

patterning as assessed here in the inflorescence is impaired in the gata triple 577

but not in the gnc gnl double mutant (Fig 7) Similarly the increases in floral 578

organ numbers are already very prominent in the gata17 gata17l double 579

mutants and not much more enhanced in the gata triple or quintuple mutant 580

that includes the gata17 gata17l mutations (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) Thus 581

the LLM-domain B-GATA genes have shared overlapping but also distinct 582

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

20

roles in the control of plant development The fact that GATA15 gene function 583

is not impaired in the selected GATA15 gene insertion allele does not allow us 584

to draw any direct conclusions on the biological function of this gene based on 585

the data presented here Furthermore the fact that the mutant alleles of 586

GATA16 and GATA17 used in the complex mutants are only partially 587

defective in GATA gene expression could suggest that even stronger 588

phenotypes may be observed if loss-of-function alleles were used The two 589

strong alleles for GATA15 (gata15-2) and GATA17 (gata17-2) isolated here 590

but analyzed only as single mutants may help in the future to understand the 591

biological function of these GATA genes at further depth 592

It is interesting that the overexpression lines and the mutants of these GATA 593

genes frequently have antagonistic phenotypes This study in combination 594

with a previous study identifies such antagonistically regulated phenotypes in 595

the control of greening hypocotyl elongation branch angle formation 596

flowering time and senescence (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 597

Particularly in the case of transcription factors where the loss-of-function or 598

overexpression may affect the expression of many downstream targets genes 599

and developmental responses triggered by these target genes one may not 600

expect such a clear antagonistic relationship between mutants with reduced 601

gene functions and the overexpressors In view of the fact that 602

overexpressors likely also control the expression of genes that are normally 603

not targeted by this transcription factor when expressed from their native 604

promoter (off-targets) this observation is even more striking It may suggest 605

that the GATAs examined here control developmental responses in a dosage-606

dependent manner together with other critical factors In this context the 607

presence and abundance of the GATAs would just modulate the response but 608

would by itself not be sufficient to trigger it Further analyses will be required 609

to gain a more detailed understanding of the mode of action of the LLM-610

domain B-GATA factors in the control of gene expression 611

We had previously shown that the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 612

repress flowering since their loss-of-function mutants and overexpressors 613

displayed an early and late flowering phenotype respectively when plants 614

were grown in long-day conditions (Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) 615

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

21

We furthermore showed that the control of flowering is partially mediated by 616

the flowering time regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION 617

OF CONSTANS1) which acts downstream from GNC and GNL and whose 618

promoter can be directly bound by GNC and GNL (Richter et al 2013) In line 619

with these previous observations we show here that the complex GATA gene 620

mutants flower even earlier than the gnc gnl mutant further substantiating our 621

conclusion that LLM-domain B-GATAs are flowering time regulators in 622

Arabidopsis (Fig 10B and Fig S11) Surprisingly the complex gata mutants 623

flowered late when grown in short day conditions and their phenotype was 624

thereby antagonistic to the phenotype observed in long days (Fig 10C and 625

Fig S9) The reason for this antagonistic flowering time behavior remains to 626

be resolved but a complex scenario may be envisioned We also do not want 627

to rule out that physiological parameters become limiting in the induction of 628

flowering in the gata mutants Long term defects as a result of their reduced 629

greening may play a limiting role during the extended growth in short days 630

with short illumination periods that are not limiting when plants are grown in 631

long days 632

Several of our phenotypic analyses suggested that the LLM-domain B-GATAs 633

act in concert to control specific phenotypes The fact that at least some of the 634

phenotypes were most pronounced in the quintuple mutant and not apparent 635

or only weak in the less complex mutants suggests that the LLM-domain B-636

GATAs may cross-regulate their expression and that presence and absence 637

of one GATA could interfere with the abundance of other GATA family 638

members We have analyzed this hypothesis here by examining the 639

expression of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 640

GATA17L in the gnc gnl mutant and in the GNL overexpression line (Fig 11A) 641

In both cases we found the expression of three of the four analyzed genes to 642

be differentially regulated in the two genetic backgrounds suggesting that the 643

GATAs can cross-regulate their gene expression and supporting again the 644

hypothesis that the GATAs have a repressive activity on the transcription of 645

the other GATA genes Further support for such a hypothetical cross-646

regulation came from a ChIP-seq analysis with GNL where we observed a 647

strong binding of GNL when expressed from its own promoter to the three 648

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

6

RESULTS 147

Evolutionary conservation of the LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 148

Brassicaceae The Arabidopsis thaliana genome encodes six LLM-domain 149

GATA transcription factors namely GNC (AtGATA21) GNL (AtGATA22) as 150

well as GATA15 (AtGATA15) GATA16 (AtGATA16) GATA17 (AtGATA17) 151

and GATA17L (AtGATA17-LIKE) (Behringer et al 2014 Behringer and 152

Schwechheimer 2015) Phylogenetic analyses showed that these proteins 153

can be grouped into three pairs of highly homologous proteins comprised of 154

the with regard to the length of their N-termini long B-GATAs GNC and GNL 155

and the short B-GATAs GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and 156

GATA17L respectively (Fig 1A and B Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014 157

Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) It had previously become apparent 158

that the respective subfamilies of long and short B-GATAs were conserved in 159

different plant species but that gene duplications in individual subfamilies may 160

have led to a differential expansion of these subfamilies in different species 161

(Behringer et al 2014) To gain an insight into the conservation of these 162

GATAs within the family of Brassicaceae we searched for LLM-domain B-163

GATAs in the fully sequenced genomes of Arabidopsis lyrata Capsella 164

rubella Eutrema salsugineum and Brassica rapa We retrieved orthologs for 165

each of the six Arabidopsis B-GATAs within each Brassicaceae species (Fig 166

S1 and Fig S2) Whereas the Arabidopsis lyrata Capsella rubella and 167

Eutrema salsugineum genomes contained exactly one apparent ortholog for 168

each of the six Arabidopsis thaliana genes the Brassica rapa genome known 169

to have undergone hexaploidization followed by genome fractionation 170

retained at least two orthologs each for GNC GNL GATA17 and GATA17L 171

and one ortholog of GATA15 and GATA16 (Fig S1 and Fig S2) (Wang et al 172

2011 Tang et al 2012) In summary we concluded that the six LLM-domain 173

B-GATAs are conserved in the different Brassicaceae examined here and that 174

four members of the gene family were present in multiple copies in Brassica 175

rapa 176

177

Characterization of insertion mutants of the six LLM-domain B-GATA 178

genes All previously published genetic analyses of the LLM-domain B-179

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

7

GATAs genes from Arabidopsis thaliana focused on GNC and GNL 180

(Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) As yet no mutants have been 181

described for the remaining four LLM-domain B-GATAs and their biological 182

function remains elusive We therefore identified homozygous lines of T-DNA 183

insertion mutants for each of the six genes (Fig 1C Fig S3) and 184

subsequently analyzed these lines with regard to the effects of the respective 185

mutations on gene expression using quantitative real time PCR (qRT-PCR) 186

and semi-quantitative PCR (sqRT-PCR) (Fig S3B) The analysis of the gnc 187

allele (Salk_001778) which had already been used in several publications 188

suggested that neither the full-length transcript nor regions downstream from 189

the insertion site were transcribed (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) (Richter et al 2010) 190

(Bi et al 2005) Similarly analyses of the gnl insertion mutant (Salk_003995) 191

using primers spanning the entire transcript or flanking the T-DNA harbored in 192

the intron suggested that the GNL full-length transcript was absent (Fig 1C 193

and Fig S3B) (Bi et al 2005 Richter et al 2010) Although one of the 194

selected GATA15 insertion alleles (gata15-1 SAIL_618_B11) was annotated 195

as an in-gene insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) we found no evidence for a 196

change of GATA15 gene expression in the homozygous insertion line (Fig 1C 197

and Fig S3B) Sequencing of the insertion site then revealed that the 198

insertion was downstream from the genersquos 3-UTR (untranslated region) 199

indicating that the GATA15 gene was intact in SAIL_618_B11 (Fig 1C and 200

Fig S3B) The analysis of a second allele (gata15-2 WiscDsLox471A10) with 201

an exon-insertion revealed a strong down-regulation of GATA15 expression in 202

both RT-PCR analyses (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) In a GATA16 allele with a T-203

DNA insertion in the genersquos 3-UTR (gata16-1 Salk_021471) transcript 204

abundance was partially reduced (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) The abundance of 205

GATA17 was also partially reduced in Salk_101994 (gata17-1) which 206

harbored a T-DNA insertion in the genes 5-UTR and strongly reduced in 207

SALK_049041 (gata17-2) which carried an insertion in the LLM-domain-208

encoding gene region (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) Finally we detected no 209

transcript in our analyses of a GATA17L exon insertion allele (gata17l-1 210

Salk_026798) when using primer pairs spanning the insertion or located 211

downstream from the insertion site (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) When analyzing 212

this allele with a primer combination upstream of the insertion we were able 213

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

8

to detect residual transcript in gata17l-1 but judged that this may not give rise 214

to a fully functional protein since the insertion was upstream of the LLM-215

domain (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) We concluded that the expression of the 216

respective GATA genes was absent or at least strongly reduced in alleles for 217

GNC (gnc) GNL (gnl) GATA15 (gata15-2) GATA17 (gata17-2) and 218

GATA17L (gata17l-1) alleles The gata16-1 and gata17-1 alleles were only 219

partially impaired in the expression of the respective genes whereas the 220

gata15-1 allele was not affected in GATA15 expression The gata15-2 and 221

gata17-2 alleles became available to us only later in this study and for 222

strategic reasons could not be included in the generation of the complex 223

mutant combinations described below Any of the phenotypes described in the 224

following sections for the more complex mutant combinations were not 225

apparent in the gata15-2 and gata17-2 single mutants We therefore exclude 226

the possibility that these genes are by themselves responsible for any of the 227

phenotypes described here for the higher order mutants 228

229

LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening We did not observe 230

any obvious defects in the gata single mutants apart from the already well-231

documented defects in greening of the gnc mutants (Bi et al 2005 Richter et 232

al 2010 Chiang et al 2012) To generate higher order mutants in the 233

closely related B-GATA genes we combined the alleles gnc gnl gata15-1 234

gata16-1 gata17-1 and gata17l-1 For simplicity we will subsequently omit 235

the respective allele numbers Since the presence of the misannotated 236

gata15-1 mutation does not provide information about the loss of GATA15 we 237

refer to this allele as GATA15 238

Through genetic crosses we obtained gata17 gata17l double mutants 239

GATA15 gata16 gata17 gata17l gnc gnl GATA15 gata16 and gnc gnl gata17 240

gata17l triple and quadruple mutants as well as a gnc gnl GATA15 gata16 241

gata17 gata17l quintuple mutant In the following we will refer to the gata 242

quintuple mutant as the quintuple mutant and to the GATA15 gata16 gata17 243

gata17l triple mutant that does not include the gnc and gnl alleles as the 244

(complementary) triple mutant In all other cases we will specify the allele 245

combinations 246

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

9

To examine a possible redundant function among the B-GATAs in the control 247

of greening we analyzed greening and chlorophyll content in 14 day-old light-248

grown gata mutant plants (Fig 1D and E) Although there was no indication 249

for a defect in greening in gata17 gata17l or in the triple mutant we found that 250

the greening defect of gnc gnl was further enhanced in the gnc gnl gata17 251

gata17l quadruple mutant and even more in the quintuple mutant (Fig 1D and 252

E) At the same time greening defects were not obvious in any of the gata 253

single mutants (Fig 1E) In the case of the gata15 and gata17 alleles this 254

was not due to the fact that weak alleles had been chosen for the complex 255

mutants since also the severe alleles gata15-2 and gata17-2 showed no 256

reduction in chlorophyll levels when compared to the wild type (Fig 1E) 257

The further reduction in chlorophyll accumulation in the quintuple mutant was 258

also apparent when we analyzed chlorophyll abundance by fluorescence 259

microscopy where we found reduced chloroplast fluorescence when 260

comparing the quintuple mutant to gnc gnl (Fig 1F) Furthermore we noted 261

that the greening defect gradually disappeared in gnc gnl mutants after the 262

seedling stage but remained apparent in the quintuple mutants also in adult 263

plants (Fig S4) Taken together this suggested that all mutated GATA genes 264

participate in the control of greening and chlorophyll accumulation and that 265

the defects of mutants defective in a single gene may be suppressed by the 266

presence of the other family members 267

268

Gene expression regulation of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 269

had been in the focus of several studies based on the strong regulation of 270

their gene expression by light and CK (Bi et al 2005 Naito et al 2007 271

Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) We were therefore interested in 272

evaluating to what extent light and CK regulate the expression of the other 273

GATA genes In the case of light regulation we found that far-red red as well 274

as blue light strongly induced the expression of GNL and to some extent also 275

the expression of GNC (Fig 2) In blue light we noted a subtle but significant 276

induction of GATA15 and GATA16 (Fig 2C) Importantly this regulation was 277

not observed in the red and far-red light receptor mutant phyA phyB or in the 278

blue light receptor mutant cry1 cry2 (Fig 2) Furthermore light-induced gene 279

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

10

expression changes in red light were impaired in the quadruple mutant for the 280

PHYTOCHROME INTERACTING FACTOR (PIF) genes PIF1 PIF3 PIF4 281

and PIF5 (pifq) indicating that the light-dependent regulation in red light was 282

mediated by the phytochrome and PIF signaling pathways (Fig S5) (Leivar et 283

al 2008) 284

The CK experiments indicated that CK induces the expression of all six GATA 285

genes (Fig 3) With an about three-fold increase in transcript abundance this 286

induction was strongest for GNL but could be observed for each of the other 287

GATA genes after a one to four hour CK treatment (Fig 3) Thus CK 288

promotes the expression of all six LLM-domain B-GATAs 289

290

Mutants of LLM-domain B-GATAs are impaired in hypocotyl elongation 291

Due to the strong regulation particularly of GNL but also of GNC in far-red red 292

and blue light conditions we examined the contribution of the GATA genes to 293

hypocotyl elongation by analyzing mutant seedlings in the different light 294

conditions in two different light intensities (Fig 4) Here we found that 295

quintuple mutant seedlings had a shorter hypocotyl than wild type seedlings in 296

white light as well as in red far-red and blue light (Fig 4) Notably these 297

phenotypes were not apparent or at least not significant in the gnc gnl 298

double mutant or the triple mutant suggesting that the respective other GATA 299

genes may contribute to the hypocotyl elongation phenotype in these 300

backgrounds (Fig 4) At the same time hypocotyl length of dark-grown 301

mutant seedlings was indistinguishable in all genotypes from that observed in 302

the wild type (Fig 4E and G) The short hypocotyl phenotype of the GATA 303

gene mutants was also interesting because we previously observed that the 304

LLM-domain B-GATA overexpressors had a longer hypocotyl than the wild 305

type when grown in white light (Behringer et al 2014) When analyzed in the 306

different light conditions we found the long hypocotyl phenotype of the GNL 307

overexpression line (GNLox) was also present in far-red and blue light but 308

interestingly not in red light where hypocotyls were even shorter than in the 309

wild type or the mutants when grown in weak red light conditions (Fig 4) 310

311

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

11

GATA gene mutants have differential gene expression defects The 312

strong induction of GNL gene expression by CK was already repeatedly 313

described and is the reason for the genersquos original designation CGA1 314

(CYTOKININ-INDUCED GATA1) (Naito et al 2007 Kollmer et al 2011) In 315

order to examine the role of the GATA genes in CK-responsive gene 316

expression we performed microarray experiments with 14 day-old wild type 317

plants gnc gnl and triple mutants as well as quintuple mutants treated for 60 318

min with the CK 6-BA (6-benzylaminopurine) or a corresponding mock solvent 319

control (Fig 5 and Fig 6 Supplemental Tables S1 and S2) We then 320

analyzed the resulting data with regard to differences in basal gene 321

expression (Fig 5) and with regard to gene expression differences after the 322

CK treatment in comparison to the mock control (Fig 6) For technical 323

reasons the experiment was conducted in two rounds the first experiment 324

included the Col-0 (1) wild type control the gnc gnl double mutant and the 325

quintuple mutant the second experiment included an independent Col-0 (2) 326

wild type control and the triple mutant When we examined the expression of 327

the CK-induced ARRs (A-TYPE RESPONSE REGULATORS) of the CK 328

signaling pathway we could confirm that the respective CK induction 329

experiments were comparably efficient between the two experiments and in 330

all genotypes tested (Fig S6A) We also examined the microarray dataset 331

with regard to the expression of a previously defined so-called ldquogolden listrdquo of 332

CK-regulated genes (Bhargava et al 2013) Over 70 of the 331 entities 333

derived from this list were significantly CK-regulated in our experiments 334

(Supplemental Table S3) When applying a two-fold expression change as 335

additional filter criterion 71 of these 331 entities were identified as up- (Col-0 336

1 and Col-0 2) and 39 (Col-0 1) and 25 entities (Col-0 2) as down-regulated 337

after CK treatment (Fig S6B and Supplemental Table S3) We thus 338

concluded that the CK treatments in both experiments were similarly efficient 339

and that the data sets could be used for comparative analyses 340

The comparison of the basal gene expression profiles of the wild type 341

samples and the mutants indicated that the (untreated) quintuple mutant 342

seedlings had by far the largest number of differentially regulated genes with 343

4722 down-regulated and 976 up-regulated entities when compared to the 344

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

12

Col-0 (1) wild type (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) Furthermore the gnc 345

gnl double mutant contained 2458 down- and 294 up-regulated entities 346

respectively (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) In comparison the number 347

of differentially expressed genes was comparatively minor in the triple mutant 348

which had only 323 down- and 278 up-regulated entities in this particular 349

experiment and selected physiological growth conditions (Fig 5) 350

The comparatively strong gene expression differences in the gnc gnl double 351

and the quintuple mutants and the fact that both mutants shared the gnc gnl 352

loss-of-function at the genetic level was reflected by the large overlap 353

between the differentially expressed gene sets of the two genotypes 354

Specifically 1922 of the 2458 down-regulated entities from gnc gnl were also 355

down-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 5B) and 98 of the 294 entities 356

up-regulated in gnc gnl were also up-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 357

5B) Conversely the overlap in gene expression defects between the triple 358

mutant and the quintuple mutant was higher than that between the triple 359

mutant and gnc gnl (Fig 5B) We therefore concluded that the gene 360

expression differences between the different GATA gene mutants was 361

strongest in the quintuple mutant and that the strong increase in the number 362

of differentially regulated genes exceeded by far the differences seen in the 363

gnc gnl double mutant and the triple mutant This supported our conclusion 364

from the phenotypic analyses that the GATA genes act in a functionally 365

redundant manner 366

Since we had observed increased gene expression of all six GATA genes 367

after CK-treatment we expected that CK-induced gene expression may be 368

compromised in the gata mutants (Fig 6) Indeed of the 996 entities that 369

were down-regulated after CK-treatment in the wild type (Col-0 1) only 173 370

(18 ) and 89 (9 ) remained CK-regulated in the quintuple and gnc gnl 371

mutant respectively (Fig 6A and Supplemental Table S2) At the same time 372

of the 188 entities that were down-regulated after CK treatment in the wild 373

type sample of the second experiment (Col-0 2) 83 (44 ) remained CK-374

regulated in the gata triple mutant (Fig 6B) The differential effect on gene 375

expression between the different mutants was less pronounced when 376

examining the CK-induced genes Here 49 (quintuple mutant) 59 (gnc 377

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

13

gnl) and 63 (triple mutant) of the CK-induced entities from the respective 378

wild types remained CK-regulated in the mutants (Fig 6A and B) In summary 379

we concluded that CK-regulated gene expression is impaired in the GATA 380

gene mutants 381

382

GATA gene mutants are defective in CK-regulated developmental 383

processes Based on the strong defects of gata mutants in CK-regulated 384

gene expression we searched for phenotypes that could be explained by 385

defects in CK response CK signaling was described as a regulator of 386

phyllotactic patterning in the shoot apical meristem of Arabidopsis (Besnard et 387

al 2014) In line with a role of the LLM-domain B-GATA genes in this process 388

we observed frequent aberrations from normal phyllotactic patterning in flower 389

positioning in triple and quintuple mutant inflorescences (Fig 7) Quantitative 390

analyses revealed aberrations from the canonical angle of ~1375deg in about 391

~30 of the petioles in triple and quintuple inflorescences (Fig 7D) At the 392

same time this patterning defect was not apparent in the gnc gnl double 393

mutant Since we also did not observe a quantitative increase in the severity 394

of this phenotype between the triple and the quintuple mutant we concluded 395

that GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L may be responsible for this phenotype 396

(Fig 7D) 397

Leaf senescence is another CK-regulated process (Hwang et al 2012) In the 398

wild type CK levels are reduced during senescence and positive or negative 399

interference with the decrease in CK levels can promote and delay 400

senescence respectively (Hwang et al 2012) Senescence can be induced 401

by shifting light-grown plants to the dark and we had previously already shown 402

that leaf senescence is delayed in overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-403

GATAs (Behringer et al 2014) To examine possible senescence defects in 404

the gata mutants we floated leaves of wild type and mutant plants in the dark 405

on a mock solution or on a solution containing 005 microM or 01 microM 6-BA (Fig 406

8A ndash F) (Weaver and Amasino 2001) In line with the expectation that the 407

presence of CK in the medium would suppress the senescence process we 408

observed decreased senescence in CK-treated wild type leaves which we 409

quantitatively assessed by measuring chlorophyll levels in the mock- and CK-410

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

14

treated leaves (Fig 8F) Here we found that the effects of the senescence 411

treatment were less efficiently suppressed by CK treatments in the gnc gnl 412

double and in the quintuple mutant than in the wild type or the triple mutant 413

(Fig 8A - F) Similarly we observed a stronger effect on the decreases in 414

chlorophyll and total protein levels in the gnc gnl as well as the quintuple 415

mutant when we transferred light-grown plants for four days to the dark (Fig 416

8G ndash I) As previously reported GNL overexpressing plants (GNLox) had 417

senescence phenotypes that were antagonistic to the ones observed with the 418

mutants (Fig 8) (Behringer et al 2014) In the case of the leaf floating assay 419

CK-treatment had a stronger effect on greening and chlorophyll abundance in 420

GNLox than in the wild type (Fig 8A ndash F) When we transferred plants from 421

the light to the dark GNLox seedlings remained visibly green and did not 422

display the strong decrease in total protein abundance that we observed in 423

the wild type or the GATA gene mutants (Fig 8G ndash I) We thus concluded that 424

GATA gene mutants and overexpressors have antagonistic effects with 425

regard to the regulation of senescence and that GNC and GNL contribute 426

particularly strongly to this phenotype 427

CK induces greening in light-grown seedlings (Kobayashi et al 2012) To 428

examine to what extent CK can induce chlorophyll accumulation in the gata 429

mutants we grew plants for two weeks in constant light on medium containing 430

CK (5 nM BA) or a corresponding CK-free medium As expected chlorophyll 431

content was increased in wild type plants but this increase was neither 432

significant in the gnc gnl nor the triple or the quintuple mutants (Fig S7) We 433

thus concluded that the GATA factors are required for CK-induced greening in 434

Arabidopsis seedlings 435

It was previously reported that hypocotyl elongation could be repressed by 436

incubating dark-grown seedlings in the presence of CK (Su and Howell 1995) 437

Since the GATA gene mutants had displayed a hypocotyl elongation defect in 438

light-grown seedlings (Fig 4) we also explored the link between hypocotyl 439

elongation and CK However when we tested the effects of CK on hypocotyl 440

elongation in dark-grown seedlings we did not detect any significant 441

differences in the response between the different genotypes tested (Fig S8) 442

It is thus unlikely that the GATA genes participate in this elongation response 443

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

15

Branching is another phenotype that has been attributed to defects in CK 444

biosynthesis and response (El-Showk et al 2013) When we analyzed the 445

general habitus of the quintuple mutants we noted that they had an increased 446

number of secondary branches that was combined with a reduced plant 447

height (Fig 9A - C) Occasionally we also observed the outgrowth of 448

inflorescences in the axils of lateral inflorescences in the mutants whereas we 449

had not noted this phenotype in the wild type (Fig 9D and E) A quantitative 450

analysis of these phenotypes over all gata mutant phenotypes revealed that 451

the number of first and second order lateral branches increased with 452

increasing mutant complexity (Fig 9B) Here we observed strong effects 453

already in the gata17 gata17l mutant as well as the gnc gnl double mutant but 454

strongest defects in the triple and the quintuple mutant thus all five GATA 455

genes may contribute to this phenotype (Fig 9B) At the same time plant 456

height was reduced to a significant but still minor level in these mutants 457

suggesting that decreases in plant height which may have indirect 458

consequences on the general plant habitus and branching are not the 459

primary cause for altered branching patterns in the gata mutants (Fig 9C) It 460

is further important to note that the higher order GATA gene mutants initiated 461

fewer vegetative buds but had a higher number of growing buds as reflected 462

by the increased branch numbers (Fig 9F) Thus axillary bud formation is 463

promoted and bud outgrowth is repressed by the GATAs in the wild type 464

Another phenotype that became apparent during our analysis of the gata 465

mutant plant habitus was an increase in the angle formed between the 466

primary inflorescence and the lateral inflorescences (Fig 9G and H Fig S9) 467

gata mutants had a decreased angle formed between the primary 468

inflorescence and lateral inflorescences and this phenotype was strongest in 469

the quintuple mutant and intermediate in the gnc gnl and triple mutants (Fig 470

9G and H Fig S9) Interestingly we had previously observed increased 471

branch angles in GATA overexpression lines such as GNLox (Fig S9) 472

(Behringer et al 2014) We thus concluded that GATA gene mutants and 473

overexpressors antagonistically regulate branch angles in Arabidopsis 474

475

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

16

GATA genes regulate petal and sepal numbers as well as silique length 476

CK signaling has recently been implicated in the control of floral development 477

(Han et al 2014) When we analyzed gata mutant flowers in more detail we 478

noted with interest aberrations in floral organ numbers in comparison to the 479

wild type (Fig 10A) Whereas wild type flowers have generally four sepals 480

and four petals and only rarely deviate from this pattern (in our study in 481

around 2 of the cases) a strong increase in flowers with more than four 482

(generally five in rare cases six) petals and sepals became apparent in the 483

higher order gata mutants (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) In the gata17 gata17l 484

mutants we observed flowers with more than four sepals and petals in 12 of 485

all flowers and this number was slightly enhanced in the triple mutant (13 486

petals) and the quintuple mutant (14 petals) (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) 487

Importantly the single mutants with the clearest apparent effect were the 488

gata17 and gata17l mutants and inversely mutations in GNC and GNL 489

contributed only to a minor extent to this phenotype (Fig S10A) In summary 490

this analysis revealed that GATA17 and GATA17L make a particularly strong 491

contribution to the floral morphology phenotype of the gata mutants 492

Since we had previously noted that overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-493

GATAs have short siliques and a reduced number of seeds per silique we 494

also analyzed silique length and seed set in the gata mutants (Fig S10B - D) 495

In line with an antagonistic regulation of these traits in the gata mutants we 496

measured significant increases in seed set in the siliques of the gnc gnl the 497

triple as well as the quintuple mutants and we detected significant increases 498

in silique length in all mutant backgrounds (Fig S10B - D) We thus concluded 499

that the GATA genes repress silique elongation and seed set in the wild type 500

at least to a minor extent A differential contribution of individual GATAs to 501

these phenotypes could however not be resolved here 502

503

GATA gene mutants have antagonistic effects on flowering time in long 504

and short days Accelerated flowering in plants grown under long-day 505

conditions was another phenotype previously described for gnc gnl mutants 506

(Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) Conversely overexpression of the 507

LLM-domain B-GATAs causes a strong delay in flowering (Richter et al 508

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

17

2010 Richter et al 2013 Behringer et al 2014) To examine the contribution 509

of the other GATA factors to the flowering time phenotype we grew the gata 510

mutant series in long day and short day conditions with a 16 hr and 8 hr light 511

period respectively (Fig 10B and C Fig S11) Interestingly we observed a 512

gradual acceleration of flowering in long day-grown plants that was weakest in 513

the single mutants more pronounced in the double triple quadruple mutants 514

and strongest in the quintuple mutants (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) 515

We thus concluded that all LLM-domain B-GATA genes examined here may 516

contribute to the repression of flowering in long day-grown plants 517

Interestingly the effects of the reduced GATA gene function on flowering time 518

in short day conditions were antagonistic to those observed in long day-grown 519

plants in that the complex GATA gene mutants flowered much later than the 520

wild type or the less complex mutant combinations when flowering was 521

counted in days (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) We thus concluded that 522

the LLM-domain B-GATAs factors regulate flowering time in long and short 523

day conditions but in view of the antagonistic nature of this regulation that 524

their contribution to flowering time control may be complex 525

526

Cross-regulation of GATA gene expression Since several of our genetic 527

analyses had suggested a functional redundancy between the GATA genes 528

we looked for evidences of a cross-regulation of GATA gene expression in the 529

gnc gnl double mutant background There we detected indeed an increased 530

transcript abundance of GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 531

mutant which could be compensatory for the loss of GNC and GNL (Fig 11A) 532

At the same time GATA15 GATA16 and GATA17L gene expression levels 533

were significantly reduced in GNL overexpression lines (GNLox) suggesting 534

that GNL may regulate the expression of these genes 535

Since these observations indicated that molecular mechanisms may exist that 536

compensate for the loss of individual LLM-domain B-GATA genes eg in the 537

gnc gnl mutants we examined the binding of GNL to the LLM-domain GATA 538

gene promoters after ChIP-seq analysis (chromatin immunoprecipitation 539

followed by DNA sequencing) Here we found that at least three of the six 540

LLM-domain B-GATA genes were bound by GNL after immunoprecipitation of 541

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

18

HA-tagged GNL from transgenic plants expressing a functional GNLHA 542

transgene from a GNL promoter fragment in the gnc gnl background 543

(pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl Fig 11B) Through subsequent ChIP-PCR studies 544

targeting selected regions upstream from GNC GNL and GATA17 we could 545

confirm this binding through independent analyses (Fig 11C) Thus LLM-546

domain B-GATA factors may directly regulate their own expression as well as 547

that of other family members 548

549

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

19

DISCUSSION 550

In the present study we have characterized the six-membered family of LLM-551

domain B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Whereas the family has diverged when 552

compared between Arabidopsis tomato barley and Brachypodium a clear 553

conservation of this protein family can be observed within the Brassicaceae 554

family (Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014) Within the Brassicaceae GNC and 555

GNL GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and GATA17L form closely 556

related LLM-domain B-GATA pairs In a previous study we had comparatively 557

analyzed transgenic Arabidopsis lines expressing different members of the 558

LLM-domain B-GATA gene family from Arabidopsis barley and tomato and 559

concluded that these genes are functionally redundant at the biochemical 560

level since their overexpression resulted in highly similar phenotypes 561

(Behringer et al 2014) Several of the phenotypes analyzed here namely 562

greening (Fig 1D-F) hypocotyl elongation (Fig 4) plant height branching 563

patterns (Fig 9) branch angles (Fig 9 and Fig S9) silique length seed set 564

(Fig S10) flowering time (Fig 10) as well as senescence (Fig 8) are 565

strongest in the gata quintuple mutant and weaker or in some cases not even 566

apparent in the less complex gata mutant combinations Thus in line with this 567

previous study our present analysis shows that the LLM-domain B-GATA 568

genes from Arabidopsis have a shared biological function in the control of 569

multiple developmental pathways 570

Due to the high complexity of the available range of single double triple 571

quadruple and quintuple mutants we restricted many of our phenotypic 572

analyses to the gnc gnl double the complementary triple and the quintuple 573

mutants It can nevertheless be suggested based on the presently available 574

data that some phenotypes are predominantly controlled by a single LLM-575

domain B-GATA or rather an LLM-domain B-GATA gene pair Phyllotactic 576

patterning as assessed here in the inflorescence is impaired in the gata triple 577

but not in the gnc gnl double mutant (Fig 7) Similarly the increases in floral 578

organ numbers are already very prominent in the gata17 gata17l double 579

mutants and not much more enhanced in the gata triple or quintuple mutant 580

that includes the gata17 gata17l mutations (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) Thus 581

the LLM-domain B-GATA genes have shared overlapping but also distinct 582

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

20

roles in the control of plant development The fact that GATA15 gene function 583

is not impaired in the selected GATA15 gene insertion allele does not allow us 584

to draw any direct conclusions on the biological function of this gene based on 585

the data presented here Furthermore the fact that the mutant alleles of 586

GATA16 and GATA17 used in the complex mutants are only partially 587

defective in GATA gene expression could suggest that even stronger 588

phenotypes may be observed if loss-of-function alleles were used The two 589

strong alleles for GATA15 (gata15-2) and GATA17 (gata17-2) isolated here 590

but analyzed only as single mutants may help in the future to understand the 591

biological function of these GATA genes at further depth 592

It is interesting that the overexpression lines and the mutants of these GATA 593

genes frequently have antagonistic phenotypes This study in combination 594

with a previous study identifies such antagonistically regulated phenotypes in 595

the control of greening hypocotyl elongation branch angle formation 596

flowering time and senescence (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 597

Particularly in the case of transcription factors where the loss-of-function or 598

overexpression may affect the expression of many downstream targets genes 599

and developmental responses triggered by these target genes one may not 600

expect such a clear antagonistic relationship between mutants with reduced 601

gene functions and the overexpressors In view of the fact that 602

overexpressors likely also control the expression of genes that are normally 603

not targeted by this transcription factor when expressed from their native 604

promoter (off-targets) this observation is even more striking It may suggest 605

that the GATAs examined here control developmental responses in a dosage-606

dependent manner together with other critical factors In this context the 607

presence and abundance of the GATAs would just modulate the response but 608

would by itself not be sufficient to trigger it Further analyses will be required 609

to gain a more detailed understanding of the mode of action of the LLM-610

domain B-GATA factors in the control of gene expression 611

We had previously shown that the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 612

repress flowering since their loss-of-function mutants and overexpressors 613

displayed an early and late flowering phenotype respectively when plants 614

were grown in long-day conditions (Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) 615

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

21

We furthermore showed that the control of flowering is partially mediated by 616

the flowering time regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION 617

OF CONSTANS1) which acts downstream from GNC and GNL and whose 618

promoter can be directly bound by GNC and GNL (Richter et al 2013) In line 619

with these previous observations we show here that the complex GATA gene 620

mutants flower even earlier than the gnc gnl mutant further substantiating our 621

conclusion that LLM-domain B-GATAs are flowering time regulators in 622

Arabidopsis (Fig 10B and Fig S11) Surprisingly the complex gata mutants 623

flowered late when grown in short day conditions and their phenotype was 624

thereby antagonistic to the phenotype observed in long days (Fig 10C and 625

Fig S9) The reason for this antagonistic flowering time behavior remains to 626

be resolved but a complex scenario may be envisioned We also do not want 627

to rule out that physiological parameters become limiting in the induction of 628

flowering in the gata mutants Long term defects as a result of their reduced 629

greening may play a limiting role during the extended growth in short days 630

with short illumination periods that are not limiting when plants are grown in 631

long days 632

Several of our phenotypic analyses suggested that the LLM-domain B-GATAs 633

act in concert to control specific phenotypes The fact that at least some of the 634

phenotypes were most pronounced in the quintuple mutant and not apparent 635

or only weak in the less complex mutants suggests that the LLM-domain B-636

GATAs may cross-regulate their expression and that presence and absence 637

of one GATA could interfere with the abundance of other GATA family 638

members We have analyzed this hypothesis here by examining the 639

expression of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 640

GATA17L in the gnc gnl mutant and in the GNL overexpression line (Fig 11A) 641

In both cases we found the expression of three of the four analyzed genes to 642

be differentially regulated in the two genetic backgrounds suggesting that the 643

GATAs can cross-regulate their gene expression and supporting again the 644

hypothesis that the GATAs have a repressive activity on the transcription of 645

the other GATA genes Further support for such a hypothetical cross-646

regulation came from a ChIP-seq analysis with GNL where we observed a 647

strong binding of GNL when expressed from its own promoter to the three 648

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

7

GATAs genes from Arabidopsis thaliana focused on GNC and GNL 180

(Behringer and Schwechheimer 2015) As yet no mutants have been 181

described for the remaining four LLM-domain B-GATAs and their biological 182

function remains elusive We therefore identified homozygous lines of T-DNA 183

insertion mutants for each of the six genes (Fig 1C Fig S3) and 184

subsequently analyzed these lines with regard to the effects of the respective 185

mutations on gene expression using quantitative real time PCR (qRT-PCR) 186

and semi-quantitative PCR (sqRT-PCR) (Fig S3B) The analysis of the gnc 187

allele (Salk_001778) which had already been used in several publications 188

suggested that neither the full-length transcript nor regions downstream from 189

the insertion site were transcribed (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) (Richter et al 2010) 190

(Bi et al 2005) Similarly analyses of the gnl insertion mutant (Salk_003995) 191

using primers spanning the entire transcript or flanking the T-DNA harbored in 192

the intron suggested that the GNL full-length transcript was absent (Fig 1C 193

and Fig S3B) (Bi et al 2005 Richter et al 2010) Although one of the 194

selected GATA15 insertion alleles (gata15-1 SAIL_618_B11) was annotated 195

as an in-gene insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) we found no evidence for a 196

change of GATA15 gene expression in the homozygous insertion line (Fig 1C 197

and Fig S3B) Sequencing of the insertion site then revealed that the 198

insertion was downstream from the genersquos 3-UTR (untranslated region) 199

indicating that the GATA15 gene was intact in SAIL_618_B11 (Fig 1C and 200

Fig S3B) The analysis of a second allele (gata15-2 WiscDsLox471A10) with 201

an exon-insertion revealed a strong down-regulation of GATA15 expression in 202

both RT-PCR analyses (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) In a GATA16 allele with a T-203

DNA insertion in the genersquos 3-UTR (gata16-1 Salk_021471) transcript 204

abundance was partially reduced (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) The abundance of 205

GATA17 was also partially reduced in Salk_101994 (gata17-1) which 206

harbored a T-DNA insertion in the genes 5-UTR and strongly reduced in 207

SALK_049041 (gata17-2) which carried an insertion in the LLM-domain-208

encoding gene region (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) Finally we detected no 209

transcript in our analyses of a GATA17L exon insertion allele (gata17l-1 210

Salk_026798) when using primer pairs spanning the insertion or located 211

downstream from the insertion site (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) When analyzing 212

this allele with a primer combination upstream of the insertion we were able 213

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

8

to detect residual transcript in gata17l-1 but judged that this may not give rise 214

to a fully functional protein since the insertion was upstream of the LLM-215

domain (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) We concluded that the expression of the 216

respective GATA genes was absent or at least strongly reduced in alleles for 217

GNC (gnc) GNL (gnl) GATA15 (gata15-2) GATA17 (gata17-2) and 218

GATA17L (gata17l-1) alleles The gata16-1 and gata17-1 alleles were only 219

partially impaired in the expression of the respective genes whereas the 220

gata15-1 allele was not affected in GATA15 expression The gata15-2 and 221

gata17-2 alleles became available to us only later in this study and for 222

strategic reasons could not be included in the generation of the complex 223

mutant combinations described below Any of the phenotypes described in the 224

following sections for the more complex mutant combinations were not 225

apparent in the gata15-2 and gata17-2 single mutants We therefore exclude 226

the possibility that these genes are by themselves responsible for any of the 227

phenotypes described here for the higher order mutants 228

229

LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening We did not observe 230

any obvious defects in the gata single mutants apart from the already well-231

documented defects in greening of the gnc mutants (Bi et al 2005 Richter et 232

al 2010 Chiang et al 2012) To generate higher order mutants in the 233

closely related B-GATA genes we combined the alleles gnc gnl gata15-1 234

gata16-1 gata17-1 and gata17l-1 For simplicity we will subsequently omit 235

the respective allele numbers Since the presence of the misannotated 236

gata15-1 mutation does not provide information about the loss of GATA15 we 237

refer to this allele as GATA15 238

Through genetic crosses we obtained gata17 gata17l double mutants 239

GATA15 gata16 gata17 gata17l gnc gnl GATA15 gata16 and gnc gnl gata17 240

gata17l triple and quadruple mutants as well as a gnc gnl GATA15 gata16 241

gata17 gata17l quintuple mutant In the following we will refer to the gata 242

quintuple mutant as the quintuple mutant and to the GATA15 gata16 gata17 243

gata17l triple mutant that does not include the gnc and gnl alleles as the 244

(complementary) triple mutant In all other cases we will specify the allele 245

combinations 246

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

9

To examine a possible redundant function among the B-GATAs in the control 247

of greening we analyzed greening and chlorophyll content in 14 day-old light-248

grown gata mutant plants (Fig 1D and E) Although there was no indication 249

for a defect in greening in gata17 gata17l or in the triple mutant we found that 250

the greening defect of gnc gnl was further enhanced in the gnc gnl gata17 251

gata17l quadruple mutant and even more in the quintuple mutant (Fig 1D and 252

E) At the same time greening defects were not obvious in any of the gata 253

single mutants (Fig 1E) In the case of the gata15 and gata17 alleles this 254

was not due to the fact that weak alleles had been chosen for the complex 255

mutants since also the severe alleles gata15-2 and gata17-2 showed no 256

reduction in chlorophyll levels when compared to the wild type (Fig 1E) 257

The further reduction in chlorophyll accumulation in the quintuple mutant was 258

also apparent when we analyzed chlorophyll abundance by fluorescence 259

microscopy where we found reduced chloroplast fluorescence when 260

comparing the quintuple mutant to gnc gnl (Fig 1F) Furthermore we noted 261

that the greening defect gradually disappeared in gnc gnl mutants after the 262

seedling stage but remained apparent in the quintuple mutants also in adult 263

plants (Fig S4) Taken together this suggested that all mutated GATA genes 264

participate in the control of greening and chlorophyll accumulation and that 265

the defects of mutants defective in a single gene may be suppressed by the 266

presence of the other family members 267

268

Gene expression regulation of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 269

had been in the focus of several studies based on the strong regulation of 270

their gene expression by light and CK (Bi et al 2005 Naito et al 2007 271

Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) We were therefore interested in 272

evaluating to what extent light and CK regulate the expression of the other 273

GATA genes In the case of light regulation we found that far-red red as well 274

as blue light strongly induced the expression of GNL and to some extent also 275

the expression of GNC (Fig 2) In blue light we noted a subtle but significant 276

induction of GATA15 and GATA16 (Fig 2C) Importantly this regulation was 277

not observed in the red and far-red light receptor mutant phyA phyB or in the 278

blue light receptor mutant cry1 cry2 (Fig 2) Furthermore light-induced gene 279

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

10

expression changes in red light were impaired in the quadruple mutant for the 280

PHYTOCHROME INTERACTING FACTOR (PIF) genes PIF1 PIF3 PIF4 281

and PIF5 (pifq) indicating that the light-dependent regulation in red light was 282

mediated by the phytochrome and PIF signaling pathways (Fig S5) (Leivar et 283

al 2008) 284

The CK experiments indicated that CK induces the expression of all six GATA 285

genes (Fig 3) With an about three-fold increase in transcript abundance this 286

induction was strongest for GNL but could be observed for each of the other 287

GATA genes after a one to four hour CK treatment (Fig 3) Thus CK 288

promotes the expression of all six LLM-domain B-GATAs 289

290

Mutants of LLM-domain B-GATAs are impaired in hypocotyl elongation 291

Due to the strong regulation particularly of GNL but also of GNC in far-red red 292

and blue light conditions we examined the contribution of the GATA genes to 293

hypocotyl elongation by analyzing mutant seedlings in the different light 294

conditions in two different light intensities (Fig 4) Here we found that 295

quintuple mutant seedlings had a shorter hypocotyl than wild type seedlings in 296

white light as well as in red far-red and blue light (Fig 4) Notably these 297

phenotypes were not apparent or at least not significant in the gnc gnl 298

double mutant or the triple mutant suggesting that the respective other GATA 299

genes may contribute to the hypocotyl elongation phenotype in these 300

backgrounds (Fig 4) At the same time hypocotyl length of dark-grown 301

mutant seedlings was indistinguishable in all genotypes from that observed in 302

the wild type (Fig 4E and G) The short hypocotyl phenotype of the GATA 303

gene mutants was also interesting because we previously observed that the 304

LLM-domain B-GATA overexpressors had a longer hypocotyl than the wild 305

type when grown in white light (Behringer et al 2014) When analyzed in the 306

different light conditions we found the long hypocotyl phenotype of the GNL 307

overexpression line (GNLox) was also present in far-red and blue light but 308

interestingly not in red light where hypocotyls were even shorter than in the 309

wild type or the mutants when grown in weak red light conditions (Fig 4) 310

311

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

11

GATA gene mutants have differential gene expression defects The 312

strong induction of GNL gene expression by CK was already repeatedly 313

described and is the reason for the genersquos original designation CGA1 314

(CYTOKININ-INDUCED GATA1) (Naito et al 2007 Kollmer et al 2011) In 315

order to examine the role of the GATA genes in CK-responsive gene 316

expression we performed microarray experiments with 14 day-old wild type 317

plants gnc gnl and triple mutants as well as quintuple mutants treated for 60 318

min with the CK 6-BA (6-benzylaminopurine) or a corresponding mock solvent 319

control (Fig 5 and Fig 6 Supplemental Tables S1 and S2) We then 320

analyzed the resulting data with regard to differences in basal gene 321

expression (Fig 5) and with regard to gene expression differences after the 322

CK treatment in comparison to the mock control (Fig 6) For technical 323

reasons the experiment was conducted in two rounds the first experiment 324

included the Col-0 (1) wild type control the gnc gnl double mutant and the 325

quintuple mutant the second experiment included an independent Col-0 (2) 326

wild type control and the triple mutant When we examined the expression of 327

the CK-induced ARRs (A-TYPE RESPONSE REGULATORS) of the CK 328

signaling pathway we could confirm that the respective CK induction 329

experiments were comparably efficient between the two experiments and in 330

all genotypes tested (Fig S6A) We also examined the microarray dataset 331

with regard to the expression of a previously defined so-called ldquogolden listrdquo of 332

CK-regulated genes (Bhargava et al 2013) Over 70 of the 331 entities 333

derived from this list were significantly CK-regulated in our experiments 334

(Supplemental Table S3) When applying a two-fold expression change as 335

additional filter criterion 71 of these 331 entities were identified as up- (Col-0 336

1 and Col-0 2) and 39 (Col-0 1) and 25 entities (Col-0 2) as down-regulated 337

after CK treatment (Fig S6B and Supplemental Table S3) We thus 338

concluded that the CK treatments in both experiments were similarly efficient 339

and that the data sets could be used for comparative analyses 340

The comparison of the basal gene expression profiles of the wild type 341

samples and the mutants indicated that the (untreated) quintuple mutant 342

seedlings had by far the largest number of differentially regulated genes with 343

4722 down-regulated and 976 up-regulated entities when compared to the 344

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

12

Col-0 (1) wild type (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) Furthermore the gnc 345

gnl double mutant contained 2458 down- and 294 up-regulated entities 346

respectively (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) In comparison the number 347

of differentially expressed genes was comparatively minor in the triple mutant 348

which had only 323 down- and 278 up-regulated entities in this particular 349

experiment and selected physiological growth conditions (Fig 5) 350

The comparatively strong gene expression differences in the gnc gnl double 351

and the quintuple mutants and the fact that both mutants shared the gnc gnl 352

loss-of-function at the genetic level was reflected by the large overlap 353

between the differentially expressed gene sets of the two genotypes 354

Specifically 1922 of the 2458 down-regulated entities from gnc gnl were also 355

down-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 5B) and 98 of the 294 entities 356

up-regulated in gnc gnl were also up-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 357

5B) Conversely the overlap in gene expression defects between the triple 358

mutant and the quintuple mutant was higher than that between the triple 359

mutant and gnc gnl (Fig 5B) We therefore concluded that the gene 360

expression differences between the different GATA gene mutants was 361

strongest in the quintuple mutant and that the strong increase in the number 362

of differentially regulated genes exceeded by far the differences seen in the 363

gnc gnl double mutant and the triple mutant This supported our conclusion 364

from the phenotypic analyses that the GATA genes act in a functionally 365

redundant manner 366

Since we had observed increased gene expression of all six GATA genes 367

after CK-treatment we expected that CK-induced gene expression may be 368

compromised in the gata mutants (Fig 6) Indeed of the 996 entities that 369

were down-regulated after CK-treatment in the wild type (Col-0 1) only 173 370

(18 ) and 89 (9 ) remained CK-regulated in the quintuple and gnc gnl 371

mutant respectively (Fig 6A and Supplemental Table S2) At the same time 372

of the 188 entities that were down-regulated after CK treatment in the wild 373

type sample of the second experiment (Col-0 2) 83 (44 ) remained CK-374

regulated in the gata triple mutant (Fig 6B) The differential effect on gene 375

expression between the different mutants was less pronounced when 376

examining the CK-induced genes Here 49 (quintuple mutant) 59 (gnc 377

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

13

gnl) and 63 (triple mutant) of the CK-induced entities from the respective 378

wild types remained CK-regulated in the mutants (Fig 6A and B) In summary 379

we concluded that CK-regulated gene expression is impaired in the GATA 380

gene mutants 381

382

GATA gene mutants are defective in CK-regulated developmental 383

processes Based on the strong defects of gata mutants in CK-regulated 384

gene expression we searched for phenotypes that could be explained by 385

defects in CK response CK signaling was described as a regulator of 386

phyllotactic patterning in the shoot apical meristem of Arabidopsis (Besnard et 387

al 2014) In line with a role of the LLM-domain B-GATA genes in this process 388

we observed frequent aberrations from normal phyllotactic patterning in flower 389

positioning in triple and quintuple mutant inflorescences (Fig 7) Quantitative 390

analyses revealed aberrations from the canonical angle of ~1375deg in about 391

~30 of the petioles in triple and quintuple inflorescences (Fig 7D) At the 392

same time this patterning defect was not apparent in the gnc gnl double 393

mutant Since we also did not observe a quantitative increase in the severity 394

of this phenotype between the triple and the quintuple mutant we concluded 395

that GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L may be responsible for this phenotype 396

(Fig 7D) 397

Leaf senescence is another CK-regulated process (Hwang et al 2012) In the 398

wild type CK levels are reduced during senescence and positive or negative 399

interference with the decrease in CK levels can promote and delay 400

senescence respectively (Hwang et al 2012) Senescence can be induced 401

by shifting light-grown plants to the dark and we had previously already shown 402

that leaf senescence is delayed in overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-403

GATAs (Behringer et al 2014) To examine possible senescence defects in 404

the gata mutants we floated leaves of wild type and mutant plants in the dark 405

on a mock solution or on a solution containing 005 microM or 01 microM 6-BA (Fig 406

8A ndash F) (Weaver and Amasino 2001) In line with the expectation that the 407

presence of CK in the medium would suppress the senescence process we 408

observed decreased senescence in CK-treated wild type leaves which we 409

quantitatively assessed by measuring chlorophyll levels in the mock- and CK-410

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

14

treated leaves (Fig 8F) Here we found that the effects of the senescence 411

treatment were less efficiently suppressed by CK treatments in the gnc gnl 412

double and in the quintuple mutant than in the wild type or the triple mutant 413

(Fig 8A - F) Similarly we observed a stronger effect on the decreases in 414

chlorophyll and total protein levels in the gnc gnl as well as the quintuple 415

mutant when we transferred light-grown plants for four days to the dark (Fig 416

8G ndash I) As previously reported GNL overexpressing plants (GNLox) had 417

senescence phenotypes that were antagonistic to the ones observed with the 418

mutants (Fig 8) (Behringer et al 2014) In the case of the leaf floating assay 419

CK-treatment had a stronger effect on greening and chlorophyll abundance in 420

GNLox than in the wild type (Fig 8A ndash F) When we transferred plants from 421

the light to the dark GNLox seedlings remained visibly green and did not 422

display the strong decrease in total protein abundance that we observed in 423

the wild type or the GATA gene mutants (Fig 8G ndash I) We thus concluded that 424

GATA gene mutants and overexpressors have antagonistic effects with 425

regard to the regulation of senescence and that GNC and GNL contribute 426

particularly strongly to this phenotype 427

CK induces greening in light-grown seedlings (Kobayashi et al 2012) To 428

examine to what extent CK can induce chlorophyll accumulation in the gata 429

mutants we grew plants for two weeks in constant light on medium containing 430

CK (5 nM BA) or a corresponding CK-free medium As expected chlorophyll 431

content was increased in wild type plants but this increase was neither 432

significant in the gnc gnl nor the triple or the quintuple mutants (Fig S7) We 433

thus concluded that the GATA factors are required for CK-induced greening in 434

Arabidopsis seedlings 435

It was previously reported that hypocotyl elongation could be repressed by 436

incubating dark-grown seedlings in the presence of CK (Su and Howell 1995) 437

Since the GATA gene mutants had displayed a hypocotyl elongation defect in 438

light-grown seedlings (Fig 4) we also explored the link between hypocotyl 439

elongation and CK However when we tested the effects of CK on hypocotyl 440

elongation in dark-grown seedlings we did not detect any significant 441

differences in the response between the different genotypes tested (Fig S8) 442

It is thus unlikely that the GATA genes participate in this elongation response 443

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

15

Branching is another phenotype that has been attributed to defects in CK 444

biosynthesis and response (El-Showk et al 2013) When we analyzed the 445

general habitus of the quintuple mutants we noted that they had an increased 446

number of secondary branches that was combined with a reduced plant 447

height (Fig 9A - C) Occasionally we also observed the outgrowth of 448

inflorescences in the axils of lateral inflorescences in the mutants whereas we 449

had not noted this phenotype in the wild type (Fig 9D and E) A quantitative 450

analysis of these phenotypes over all gata mutant phenotypes revealed that 451

the number of first and second order lateral branches increased with 452

increasing mutant complexity (Fig 9B) Here we observed strong effects 453

already in the gata17 gata17l mutant as well as the gnc gnl double mutant but 454

strongest defects in the triple and the quintuple mutant thus all five GATA 455

genes may contribute to this phenotype (Fig 9B) At the same time plant 456

height was reduced to a significant but still minor level in these mutants 457

suggesting that decreases in plant height which may have indirect 458

consequences on the general plant habitus and branching are not the 459

primary cause for altered branching patterns in the gata mutants (Fig 9C) It 460

is further important to note that the higher order GATA gene mutants initiated 461

fewer vegetative buds but had a higher number of growing buds as reflected 462

by the increased branch numbers (Fig 9F) Thus axillary bud formation is 463

promoted and bud outgrowth is repressed by the GATAs in the wild type 464

Another phenotype that became apparent during our analysis of the gata 465

mutant plant habitus was an increase in the angle formed between the 466

primary inflorescence and the lateral inflorescences (Fig 9G and H Fig S9) 467

gata mutants had a decreased angle formed between the primary 468

inflorescence and lateral inflorescences and this phenotype was strongest in 469

the quintuple mutant and intermediate in the gnc gnl and triple mutants (Fig 470

9G and H Fig S9) Interestingly we had previously observed increased 471

branch angles in GATA overexpression lines such as GNLox (Fig S9) 472

(Behringer et al 2014) We thus concluded that GATA gene mutants and 473

overexpressors antagonistically regulate branch angles in Arabidopsis 474

475

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

16

GATA genes regulate petal and sepal numbers as well as silique length 476

CK signaling has recently been implicated in the control of floral development 477

(Han et al 2014) When we analyzed gata mutant flowers in more detail we 478

noted with interest aberrations in floral organ numbers in comparison to the 479

wild type (Fig 10A) Whereas wild type flowers have generally four sepals 480

and four petals and only rarely deviate from this pattern (in our study in 481

around 2 of the cases) a strong increase in flowers with more than four 482

(generally five in rare cases six) petals and sepals became apparent in the 483

higher order gata mutants (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) In the gata17 gata17l 484

mutants we observed flowers with more than four sepals and petals in 12 of 485

all flowers and this number was slightly enhanced in the triple mutant (13 486

petals) and the quintuple mutant (14 petals) (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) 487

Importantly the single mutants with the clearest apparent effect were the 488

gata17 and gata17l mutants and inversely mutations in GNC and GNL 489

contributed only to a minor extent to this phenotype (Fig S10A) In summary 490

this analysis revealed that GATA17 and GATA17L make a particularly strong 491

contribution to the floral morphology phenotype of the gata mutants 492

Since we had previously noted that overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-493

GATAs have short siliques and a reduced number of seeds per silique we 494

also analyzed silique length and seed set in the gata mutants (Fig S10B - D) 495

In line with an antagonistic regulation of these traits in the gata mutants we 496

measured significant increases in seed set in the siliques of the gnc gnl the 497

triple as well as the quintuple mutants and we detected significant increases 498

in silique length in all mutant backgrounds (Fig S10B - D) We thus concluded 499

that the GATA genes repress silique elongation and seed set in the wild type 500

at least to a minor extent A differential contribution of individual GATAs to 501

these phenotypes could however not be resolved here 502

503

GATA gene mutants have antagonistic effects on flowering time in long 504

and short days Accelerated flowering in plants grown under long-day 505

conditions was another phenotype previously described for gnc gnl mutants 506

(Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) Conversely overexpression of the 507

LLM-domain B-GATAs causes a strong delay in flowering (Richter et al 508

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

17

2010 Richter et al 2013 Behringer et al 2014) To examine the contribution 509

of the other GATA factors to the flowering time phenotype we grew the gata 510

mutant series in long day and short day conditions with a 16 hr and 8 hr light 511

period respectively (Fig 10B and C Fig S11) Interestingly we observed a 512

gradual acceleration of flowering in long day-grown plants that was weakest in 513

the single mutants more pronounced in the double triple quadruple mutants 514

and strongest in the quintuple mutants (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) 515

We thus concluded that all LLM-domain B-GATA genes examined here may 516

contribute to the repression of flowering in long day-grown plants 517

Interestingly the effects of the reduced GATA gene function on flowering time 518

in short day conditions were antagonistic to those observed in long day-grown 519

plants in that the complex GATA gene mutants flowered much later than the 520

wild type or the less complex mutant combinations when flowering was 521

counted in days (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) We thus concluded that 522

the LLM-domain B-GATAs factors regulate flowering time in long and short 523

day conditions but in view of the antagonistic nature of this regulation that 524

their contribution to flowering time control may be complex 525

526

Cross-regulation of GATA gene expression Since several of our genetic 527

analyses had suggested a functional redundancy between the GATA genes 528

we looked for evidences of a cross-regulation of GATA gene expression in the 529

gnc gnl double mutant background There we detected indeed an increased 530

transcript abundance of GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 531

mutant which could be compensatory for the loss of GNC and GNL (Fig 11A) 532

At the same time GATA15 GATA16 and GATA17L gene expression levels 533

were significantly reduced in GNL overexpression lines (GNLox) suggesting 534

that GNL may regulate the expression of these genes 535

Since these observations indicated that molecular mechanisms may exist that 536

compensate for the loss of individual LLM-domain B-GATA genes eg in the 537

gnc gnl mutants we examined the binding of GNL to the LLM-domain GATA 538

gene promoters after ChIP-seq analysis (chromatin immunoprecipitation 539

followed by DNA sequencing) Here we found that at least three of the six 540

LLM-domain B-GATA genes were bound by GNL after immunoprecipitation of 541

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

18

HA-tagged GNL from transgenic plants expressing a functional GNLHA 542

transgene from a GNL promoter fragment in the gnc gnl background 543

(pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl Fig 11B) Through subsequent ChIP-PCR studies 544

targeting selected regions upstream from GNC GNL and GATA17 we could 545

confirm this binding through independent analyses (Fig 11C) Thus LLM-546

domain B-GATA factors may directly regulate their own expression as well as 547

that of other family members 548

549

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

19

DISCUSSION 550

In the present study we have characterized the six-membered family of LLM-551

domain B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Whereas the family has diverged when 552

compared between Arabidopsis tomato barley and Brachypodium a clear 553

conservation of this protein family can be observed within the Brassicaceae 554

family (Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014) Within the Brassicaceae GNC and 555

GNL GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and GATA17L form closely 556

related LLM-domain B-GATA pairs In a previous study we had comparatively 557

analyzed transgenic Arabidopsis lines expressing different members of the 558

LLM-domain B-GATA gene family from Arabidopsis barley and tomato and 559

concluded that these genes are functionally redundant at the biochemical 560

level since their overexpression resulted in highly similar phenotypes 561

(Behringer et al 2014) Several of the phenotypes analyzed here namely 562

greening (Fig 1D-F) hypocotyl elongation (Fig 4) plant height branching 563

patterns (Fig 9) branch angles (Fig 9 and Fig S9) silique length seed set 564

(Fig S10) flowering time (Fig 10) as well as senescence (Fig 8) are 565

strongest in the gata quintuple mutant and weaker or in some cases not even 566

apparent in the less complex gata mutant combinations Thus in line with this 567

previous study our present analysis shows that the LLM-domain B-GATA 568

genes from Arabidopsis have a shared biological function in the control of 569

multiple developmental pathways 570

Due to the high complexity of the available range of single double triple 571

quadruple and quintuple mutants we restricted many of our phenotypic 572

analyses to the gnc gnl double the complementary triple and the quintuple 573

mutants It can nevertheless be suggested based on the presently available 574

data that some phenotypes are predominantly controlled by a single LLM-575

domain B-GATA or rather an LLM-domain B-GATA gene pair Phyllotactic 576

patterning as assessed here in the inflorescence is impaired in the gata triple 577

but not in the gnc gnl double mutant (Fig 7) Similarly the increases in floral 578

organ numbers are already very prominent in the gata17 gata17l double 579

mutants and not much more enhanced in the gata triple or quintuple mutant 580

that includes the gata17 gata17l mutations (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) Thus 581

the LLM-domain B-GATA genes have shared overlapping but also distinct 582

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

20

roles in the control of plant development The fact that GATA15 gene function 583

is not impaired in the selected GATA15 gene insertion allele does not allow us 584

to draw any direct conclusions on the biological function of this gene based on 585

the data presented here Furthermore the fact that the mutant alleles of 586

GATA16 and GATA17 used in the complex mutants are only partially 587

defective in GATA gene expression could suggest that even stronger 588

phenotypes may be observed if loss-of-function alleles were used The two 589

strong alleles for GATA15 (gata15-2) and GATA17 (gata17-2) isolated here 590

but analyzed only as single mutants may help in the future to understand the 591

biological function of these GATA genes at further depth 592

It is interesting that the overexpression lines and the mutants of these GATA 593

genes frequently have antagonistic phenotypes This study in combination 594

with a previous study identifies such antagonistically regulated phenotypes in 595

the control of greening hypocotyl elongation branch angle formation 596

flowering time and senescence (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 597

Particularly in the case of transcription factors where the loss-of-function or 598

overexpression may affect the expression of many downstream targets genes 599

and developmental responses triggered by these target genes one may not 600

expect such a clear antagonistic relationship between mutants with reduced 601

gene functions and the overexpressors In view of the fact that 602

overexpressors likely also control the expression of genes that are normally 603

not targeted by this transcription factor when expressed from their native 604

promoter (off-targets) this observation is even more striking It may suggest 605

that the GATAs examined here control developmental responses in a dosage-606

dependent manner together with other critical factors In this context the 607

presence and abundance of the GATAs would just modulate the response but 608

would by itself not be sufficient to trigger it Further analyses will be required 609

to gain a more detailed understanding of the mode of action of the LLM-610

domain B-GATA factors in the control of gene expression 611

We had previously shown that the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 612

repress flowering since their loss-of-function mutants and overexpressors 613

displayed an early and late flowering phenotype respectively when plants 614

were grown in long-day conditions (Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) 615

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

21

We furthermore showed that the control of flowering is partially mediated by 616

the flowering time regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION 617

OF CONSTANS1) which acts downstream from GNC and GNL and whose 618

promoter can be directly bound by GNC and GNL (Richter et al 2013) In line 619

with these previous observations we show here that the complex GATA gene 620

mutants flower even earlier than the gnc gnl mutant further substantiating our 621

conclusion that LLM-domain B-GATAs are flowering time regulators in 622

Arabidopsis (Fig 10B and Fig S11) Surprisingly the complex gata mutants 623

flowered late when grown in short day conditions and their phenotype was 624

thereby antagonistic to the phenotype observed in long days (Fig 10C and 625

Fig S9) The reason for this antagonistic flowering time behavior remains to 626

be resolved but a complex scenario may be envisioned We also do not want 627

to rule out that physiological parameters become limiting in the induction of 628

flowering in the gata mutants Long term defects as a result of their reduced 629

greening may play a limiting role during the extended growth in short days 630

with short illumination periods that are not limiting when plants are grown in 631

long days 632

Several of our phenotypic analyses suggested that the LLM-domain B-GATAs 633

act in concert to control specific phenotypes The fact that at least some of the 634

phenotypes were most pronounced in the quintuple mutant and not apparent 635

or only weak in the less complex mutants suggests that the LLM-domain B-636

GATAs may cross-regulate their expression and that presence and absence 637

of one GATA could interfere with the abundance of other GATA family 638

members We have analyzed this hypothesis here by examining the 639

expression of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 640

GATA17L in the gnc gnl mutant and in the GNL overexpression line (Fig 11A) 641

In both cases we found the expression of three of the four analyzed genes to 642

be differentially regulated in the two genetic backgrounds suggesting that the 643

GATAs can cross-regulate their gene expression and supporting again the 644

hypothesis that the GATAs have a repressive activity on the transcription of 645

the other GATA genes Further support for such a hypothetical cross-646

regulation came from a ChIP-seq analysis with GNL where we observed a 647

strong binding of GNL when expressed from its own promoter to the three 648

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

8

to detect residual transcript in gata17l-1 but judged that this may not give rise 214

to a fully functional protein since the insertion was upstream of the LLM-215

domain (Fig 1C and Fig S3B) We concluded that the expression of the 216

respective GATA genes was absent or at least strongly reduced in alleles for 217

GNC (gnc) GNL (gnl) GATA15 (gata15-2) GATA17 (gata17-2) and 218

GATA17L (gata17l-1) alleles The gata16-1 and gata17-1 alleles were only 219

partially impaired in the expression of the respective genes whereas the 220

gata15-1 allele was not affected in GATA15 expression The gata15-2 and 221

gata17-2 alleles became available to us only later in this study and for 222

strategic reasons could not be included in the generation of the complex 223

mutant combinations described below Any of the phenotypes described in the 224

following sections for the more complex mutant combinations were not 225

apparent in the gata15-2 and gata17-2 single mutants We therefore exclude 226

the possibility that these genes are by themselves responsible for any of the 227

phenotypes described here for the higher order mutants 228

229

LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening We did not observe 230

any obvious defects in the gata single mutants apart from the already well-231

documented defects in greening of the gnc mutants (Bi et al 2005 Richter et 232

al 2010 Chiang et al 2012) To generate higher order mutants in the 233

closely related B-GATA genes we combined the alleles gnc gnl gata15-1 234

gata16-1 gata17-1 and gata17l-1 For simplicity we will subsequently omit 235

the respective allele numbers Since the presence of the misannotated 236

gata15-1 mutation does not provide information about the loss of GATA15 we 237

refer to this allele as GATA15 238

Through genetic crosses we obtained gata17 gata17l double mutants 239

GATA15 gata16 gata17 gata17l gnc gnl GATA15 gata16 and gnc gnl gata17 240

gata17l triple and quadruple mutants as well as a gnc gnl GATA15 gata16 241

gata17 gata17l quintuple mutant In the following we will refer to the gata 242

quintuple mutant as the quintuple mutant and to the GATA15 gata16 gata17 243

gata17l triple mutant that does not include the gnc and gnl alleles as the 244

(complementary) triple mutant In all other cases we will specify the allele 245

combinations 246

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

9

To examine a possible redundant function among the B-GATAs in the control 247

of greening we analyzed greening and chlorophyll content in 14 day-old light-248

grown gata mutant plants (Fig 1D and E) Although there was no indication 249

for a defect in greening in gata17 gata17l or in the triple mutant we found that 250

the greening defect of gnc gnl was further enhanced in the gnc gnl gata17 251

gata17l quadruple mutant and even more in the quintuple mutant (Fig 1D and 252

E) At the same time greening defects were not obvious in any of the gata 253

single mutants (Fig 1E) In the case of the gata15 and gata17 alleles this 254

was not due to the fact that weak alleles had been chosen for the complex 255

mutants since also the severe alleles gata15-2 and gata17-2 showed no 256

reduction in chlorophyll levels when compared to the wild type (Fig 1E) 257

The further reduction in chlorophyll accumulation in the quintuple mutant was 258

also apparent when we analyzed chlorophyll abundance by fluorescence 259

microscopy where we found reduced chloroplast fluorescence when 260

comparing the quintuple mutant to gnc gnl (Fig 1F) Furthermore we noted 261

that the greening defect gradually disappeared in gnc gnl mutants after the 262

seedling stage but remained apparent in the quintuple mutants also in adult 263

plants (Fig S4) Taken together this suggested that all mutated GATA genes 264

participate in the control of greening and chlorophyll accumulation and that 265

the defects of mutants defective in a single gene may be suppressed by the 266

presence of the other family members 267

268

Gene expression regulation of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 269

had been in the focus of several studies based on the strong regulation of 270

their gene expression by light and CK (Bi et al 2005 Naito et al 2007 271

Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) We were therefore interested in 272

evaluating to what extent light and CK regulate the expression of the other 273

GATA genes In the case of light regulation we found that far-red red as well 274

as blue light strongly induced the expression of GNL and to some extent also 275

the expression of GNC (Fig 2) In blue light we noted a subtle but significant 276

induction of GATA15 and GATA16 (Fig 2C) Importantly this regulation was 277

not observed in the red and far-red light receptor mutant phyA phyB or in the 278

blue light receptor mutant cry1 cry2 (Fig 2) Furthermore light-induced gene 279

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

10

expression changes in red light were impaired in the quadruple mutant for the 280

PHYTOCHROME INTERACTING FACTOR (PIF) genes PIF1 PIF3 PIF4 281

and PIF5 (pifq) indicating that the light-dependent regulation in red light was 282

mediated by the phytochrome and PIF signaling pathways (Fig S5) (Leivar et 283

al 2008) 284

The CK experiments indicated that CK induces the expression of all six GATA 285

genes (Fig 3) With an about three-fold increase in transcript abundance this 286

induction was strongest for GNL but could be observed for each of the other 287

GATA genes after a one to four hour CK treatment (Fig 3) Thus CK 288

promotes the expression of all six LLM-domain B-GATAs 289

290

Mutants of LLM-domain B-GATAs are impaired in hypocotyl elongation 291

Due to the strong regulation particularly of GNL but also of GNC in far-red red 292

and blue light conditions we examined the contribution of the GATA genes to 293

hypocotyl elongation by analyzing mutant seedlings in the different light 294

conditions in two different light intensities (Fig 4) Here we found that 295

quintuple mutant seedlings had a shorter hypocotyl than wild type seedlings in 296

white light as well as in red far-red and blue light (Fig 4) Notably these 297

phenotypes were not apparent or at least not significant in the gnc gnl 298

double mutant or the triple mutant suggesting that the respective other GATA 299

genes may contribute to the hypocotyl elongation phenotype in these 300

backgrounds (Fig 4) At the same time hypocotyl length of dark-grown 301

mutant seedlings was indistinguishable in all genotypes from that observed in 302

the wild type (Fig 4E and G) The short hypocotyl phenotype of the GATA 303

gene mutants was also interesting because we previously observed that the 304

LLM-domain B-GATA overexpressors had a longer hypocotyl than the wild 305

type when grown in white light (Behringer et al 2014) When analyzed in the 306

different light conditions we found the long hypocotyl phenotype of the GNL 307

overexpression line (GNLox) was also present in far-red and blue light but 308

interestingly not in red light where hypocotyls were even shorter than in the 309

wild type or the mutants when grown in weak red light conditions (Fig 4) 310

311

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

11

GATA gene mutants have differential gene expression defects The 312

strong induction of GNL gene expression by CK was already repeatedly 313

described and is the reason for the genersquos original designation CGA1 314

(CYTOKININ-INDUCED GATA1) (Naito et al 2007 Kollmer et al 2011) In 315

order to examine the role of the GATA genes in CK-responsive gene 316

expression we performed microarray experiments with 14 day-old wild type 317

plants gnc gnl and triple mutants as well as quintuple mutants treated for 60 318

min with the CK 6-BA (6-benzylaminopurine) or a corresponding mock solvent 319

control (Fig 5 and Fig 6 Supplemental Tables S1 and S2) We then 320

analyzed the resulting data with regard to differences in basal gene 321

expression (Fig 5) and with regard to gene expression differences after the 322

CK treatment in comparison to the mock control (Fig 6) For technical 323

reasons the experiment was conducted in two rounds the first experiment 324

included the Col-0 (1) wild type control the gnc gnl double mutant and the 325

quintuple mutant the second experiment included an independent Col-0 (2) 326

wild type control and the triple mutant When we examined the expression of 327

the CK-induced ARRs (A-TYPE RESPONSE REGULATORS) of the CK 328

signaling pathway we could confirm that the respective CK induction 329

experiments were comparably efficient between the two experiments and in 330

all genotypes tested (Fig S6A) We also examined the microarray dataset 331

with regard to the expression of a previously defined so-called ldquogolden listrdquo of 332

CK-regulated genes (Bhargava et al 2013) Over 70 of the 331 entities 333

derived from this list were significantly CK-regulated in our experiments 334

(Supplemental Table S3) When applying a two-fold expression change as 335

additional filter criterion 71 of these 331 entities were identified as up- (Col-0 336

1 and Col-0 2) and 39 (Col-0 1) and 25 entities (Col-0 2) as down-regulated 337

after CK treatment (Fig S6B and Supplemental Table S3) We thus 338

concluded that the CK treatments in both experiments were similarly efficient 339

and that the data sets could be used for comparative analyses 340

The comparison of the basal gene expression profiles of the wild type 341

samples and the mutants indicated that the (untreated) quintuple mutant 342

seedlings had by far the largest number of differentially regulated genes with 343

4722 down-regulated and 976 up-regulated entities when compared to the 344

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

12

Col-0 (1) wild type (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) Furthermore the gnc 345

gnl double mutant contained 2458 down- and 294 up-regulated entities 346

respectively (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) In comparison the number 347

of differentially expressed genes was comparatively minor in the triple mutant 348

which had only 323 down- and 278 up-regulated entities in this particular 349

experiment and selected physiological growth conditions (Fig 5) 350

The comparatively strong gene expression differences in the gnc gnl double 351

and the quintuple mutants and the fact that both mutants shared the gnc gnl 352

loss-of-function at the genetic level was reflected by the large overlap 353

between the differentially expressed gene sets of the two genotypes 354

Specifically 1922 of the 2458 down-regulated entities from gnc gnl were also 355

down-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 5B) and 98 of the 294 entities 356

up-regulated in gnc gnl were also up-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 357

5B) Conversely the overlap in gene expression defects between the triple 358

mutant and the quintuple mutant was higher than that between the triple 359

mutant and gnc gnl (Fig 5B) We therefore concluded that the gene 360

expression differences between the different GATA gene mutants was 361

strongest in the quintuple mutant and that the strong increase in the number 362

of differentially regulated genes exceeded by far the differences seen in the 363

gnc gnl double mutant and the triple mutant This supported our conclusion 364

from the phenotypic analyses that the GATA genes act in a functionally 365

redundant manner 366

Since we had observed increased gene expression of all six GATA genes 367

after CK-treatment we expected that CK-induced gene expression may be 368

compromised in the gata mutants (Fig 6) Indeed of the 996 entities that 369

were down-regulated after CK-treatment in the wild type (Col-0 1) only 173 370

(18 ) and 89 (9 ) remained CK-regulated in the quintuple and gnc gnl 371

mutant respectively (Fig 6A and Supplemental Table S2) At the same time 372

of the 188 entities that were down-regulated after CK treatment in the wild 373

type sample of the second experiment (Col-0 2) 83 (44 ) remained CK-374

regulated in the gata triple mutant (Fig 6B) The differential effect on gene 375

expression between the different mutants was less pronounced when 376

examining the CK-induced genes Here 49 (quintuple mutant) 59 (gnc 377

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

13

gnl) and 63 (triple mutant) of the CK-induced entities from the respective 378

wild types remained CK-regulated in the mutants (Fig 6A and B) In summary 379

we concluded that CK-regulated gene expression is impaired in the GATA 380

gene mutants 381

382

GATA gene mutants are defective in CK-regulated developmental 383

processes Based on the strong defects of gata mutants in CK-regulated 384

gene expression we searched for phenotypes that could be explained by 385

defects in CK response CK signaling was described as a regulator of 386

phyllotactic patterning in the shoot apical meristem of Arabidopsis (Besnard et 387

al 2014) In line with a role of the LLM-domain B-GATA genes in this process 388

we observed frequent aberrations from normal phyllotactic patterning in flower 389

positioning in triple and quintuple mutant inflorescences (Fig 7) Quantitative 390

analyses revealed aberrations from the canonical angle of ~1375deg in about 391

~30 of the petioles in triple and quintuple inflorescences (Fig 7D) At the 392

same time this patterning defect was not apparent in the gnc gnl double 393

mutant Since we also did not observe a quantitative increase in the severity 394

of this phenotype between the triple and the quintuple mutant we concluded 395

that GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L may be responsible for this phenotype 396

(Fig 7D) 397

Leaf senescence is another CK-regulated process (Hwang et al 2012) In the 398

wild type CK levels are reduced during senescence and positive or negative 399

interference with the decrease in CK levels can promote and delay 400

senescence respectively (Hwang et al 2012) Senescence can be induced 401

by shifting light-grown plants to the dark and we had previously already shown 402

that leaf senescence is delayed in overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-403

GATAs (Behringer et al 2014) To examine possible senescence defects in 404

the gata mutants we floated leaves of wild type and mutant plants in the dark 405

on a mock solution or on a solution containing 005 microM or 01 microM 6-BA (Fig 406

8A ndash F) (Weaver and Amasino 2001) In line with the expectation that the 407

presence of CK in the medium would suppress the senescence process we 408

observed decreased senescence in CK-treated wild type leaves which we 409

quantitatively assessed by measuring chlorophyll levels in the mock- and CK-410

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

14

treated leaves (Fig 8F) Here we found that the effects of the senescence 411

treatment were less efficiently suppressed by CK treatments in the gnc gnl 412

double and in the quintuple mutant than in the wild type or the triple mutant 413

(Fig 8A - F) Similarly we observed a stronger effect on the decreases in 414

chlorophyll and total protein levels in the gnc gnl as well as the quintuple 415

mutant when we transferred light-grown plants for four days to the dark (Fig 416

8G ndash I) As previously reported GNL overexpressing plants (GNLox) had 417

senescence phenotypes that were antagonistic to the ones observed with the 418

mutants (Fig 8) (Behringer et al 2014) In the case of the leaf floating assay 419

CK-treatment had a stronger effect on greening and chlorophyll abundance in 420

GNLox than in the wild type (Fig 8A ndash F) When we transferred plants from 421

the light to the dark GNLox seedlings remained visibly green and did not 422

display the strong decrease in total protein abundance that we observed in 423

the wild type or the GATA gene mutants (Fig 8G ndash I) We thus concluded that 424

GATA gene mutants and overexpressors have antagonistic effects with 425

regard to the regulation of senescence and that GNC and GNL contribute 426

particularly strongly to this phenotype 427

CK induces greening in light-grown seedlings (Kobayashi et al 2012) To 428

examine to what extent CK can induce chlorophyll accumulation in the gata 429

mutants we grew plants for two weeks in constant light on medium containing 430

CK (5 nM BA) or a corresponding CK-free medium As expected chlorophyll 431

content was increased in wild type plants but this increase was neither 432

significant in the gnc gnl nor the triple or the quintuple mutants (Fig S7) We 433

thus concluded that the GATA factors are required for CK-induced greening in 434

Arabidopsis seedlings 435

It was previously reported that hypocotyl elongation could be repressed by 436

incubating dark-grown seedlings in the presence of CK (Su and Howell 1995) 437

Since the GATA gene mutants had displayed a hypocotyl elongation defect in 438

light-grown seedlings (Fig 4) we also explored the link between hypocotyl 439

elongation and CK However when we tested the effects of CK on hypocotyl 440

elongation in dark-grown seedlings we did not detect any significant 441

differences in the response between the different genotypes tested (Fig S8) 442

It is thus unlikely that the GATA genes participate in this elongation response 443

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

15

Branching is another phenotype that has been attributed to defects in CK 444

biosynthesis and response (El-Showk et al 2013) When we analyzed the 445

general habitus of the quintuple mutants we noted that they had an increased 446

number of secondary branches that was combined with a reduced plant 447

height (Fig 9A - C) Occasionally we also observed the outgrowth of 448

inflorescences in the axils of lateral inflorescences in the mutants whereas we 449

had not noted this phenotype in the wild type (Fig 9D and E) A quantitative 450

analysis of these phenotypes over all gata mutant phenotypes revealed that 451

the number of first and second order lateral branches increased with 452

increasing mutant complexity (Fig 9B) Here we observed strong effects 453

already in the gata17 gata17l mutant as well as the gnc gnl double mutant but 454

strongest defects in the triple and the quintuple mutant thus all five GATA 455

genes may contribute to this phenotype (Fig 9B) At the same time plant 456

height was reduced to a significant but still minor level in these mutants 457

suggesting that decreases in plant height which may have indirect 458

consequences on the general plant habitus and branching are not the 459

primary cause for altered branching patterns in the gata mutants (Fig 9C) It 460

is further important to note that the higher order GATA gene mutants initiated 461

fewer vegetative buds but had a higher number of growing buds as reflected 462

by the increased branch numbers (Fig 9F) Thus axillary bud formation is 463

promoted and bud outgrowth is repressed by the GATAs in the wild type 464

Another phenotype that became apparent during our analysis of the gata 465

mutant plant habitus was an increase in the angle formed between the 466

primary inflorescence and the lateral inflorescences (Fig 9G and H Fig S9) 467

gata mutants had a decreased angle formed between the primary 468

inflorescence and lateral inflorescences and this phenotype was strongest in 469

the quintuple mutant and intermediate in the gnc gnl and triple mutants (Fig 470

9G and H Fig S9) Interestingly we had previously observed increased 471

branch angles in GATA overexpression lines such as GNLox (Fig S9) 472

(Behringer et al 2014) We thus concluded that GATA gene mutants and 473

overexpressors antagonistically regulate branch angles in Arabidopsis 474

475

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

16

GATA genes regulate petal and sepal numbers as well as silique length 476

CK signaling has recently been implicated in the control of floral development 477

(Han et al 2014) When we analyzed gata mutant flowers in more detail we 478

noted with interest aberrations in floral organ numbers in comparison to the 479

wild type (Fig 10A) Whereas wild type flowers have generally four sepals 480

and four petals and only rarely deviate from this pattern (in our study in 481

around 2 of the cases) a strong increase in flowers with more than four 482

(generally five in rare cases six) petals and sepals became apparent in the 483

higher order gata mutants (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) In the gata17 gata17l 484

mutants we observed flowers with more than four sepals and petals in 12 of 485

all flowers and this number was slightly enhanced in the triple mutant (13 486

petals) and the quintuple mutant (14 petals) (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) 487

Importantly the single mutants with the clearest apparent effect were the 488

gata17 and gata17l mutants and inversely mutations in GNC and GNL 489

contributed only to a minor extent to this phenotype (Fig S10A) In summary 490

this analysis revealed that GATA17 and GATA17L make a particularly strong 491

contribution to the floral morphology phenotype of the gata mutants 492

Since we had previously noted that overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-493

GATAs have short siliques and a reduced number of seeds per silique we 494

also analyzed silique length and seed set in the gata mutants (Fig S10B - D) 495

In line with an antagonistic regulation of these traits in the gata mutants we 496

measured significant increases in seed set in the siliques of the gnc gnl the 497

triple as well as the quintuple mutants and we detected significant increases 498

in silique length in all mutant backgrounds (Fig S10B - D) We thus concluded 499

that the GATA genes repress silique elongation and seed set in the wild type 500

at least to a minor extent A differential contribution of individual GATAs to 501

these phenotypes could however not be resolved here 502

503

GATA gene mutants have antagonistic effects on flowering time in long 504

and short days Accelerated flowering in plants grown under long-day 505

conditions was another phenotype previously described for gnc gnl mutants 506

(Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) Conversely overexpression of the 507

LLM-domain B-GATAs causes a strong delay in flowering (Richter et al 508

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

17

2010 Richter et al 2013 Behringer et al 2014) To examine the contribution 509

of the other GATA factors to the flowering time phenotype we grew the gata 510

mutant series in long day and short day conditions with a 16 hr and 8 hr light 511

period respectively (Fig 10B and C Fig S11) Interestingly we observed a 512

gradual acceleration of flowering in long day-grown plants that was weakest in 513

the single mutants more pronounced in the double triple quadruple mutants 514

and strongest in the quintuple mutants (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) 515

We thus concluded that all LLM-domain B-GATA genes examined here may 516

contribute to the repression of flowering in long day-grown plants 517

Interestingly the effects of the reduced GATA gene function on flowering time 518

in short day conditions were antagonistic to those observed in long day-grown 519

plants in that the complex GATA gene mutants flowered much later than the 520

wild type or the less complex mutant combinations when flowering was 521

counted in days (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) We thus concluded that 522

the LLM-domain B-GATAs factors regulate flowering time in long and short 523

day conditions but in view of the antagonistic nature of this regulation that 524

their contribution to flowering time control may be complex 525

526

Cross-regulation of GATA gene expression Since several of our genetic 527

analyses had suggested a functional redundancy between the GATA genes 528

we looked for evidences of a cross-regulation of GATA gene expression in the 529

gnc gnl double mutant background There we detected indeed an increased 530

transcript abundance of GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 531

mutant which could be compensatory for the loss of GNC and GNL (Fig 11A) 532

At the same time GATA15 GATA16 and GATA17L gene expression levels 533

were significantly reduced in GNL overexpression lines (GNLox) suggesting 534

that GNL may regulate the expression of these genes 535

Since these observations indicated that molecular mechanisms may exist that 536

compensate for the loss of individual LLM-domain B-GATA genes eg in the 537

gnc gnl mutants we examined the binding of GNL to the LLM-domain GATA 538

gene promoters after ChIP-seq analysis (chromatin immunoprecipitation 539

followed by DNA sequencing) Here we found that at least three of the six 540

LLM-domain B-GATA genes were bound by GNL after immunoprecipitation of 541

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

18

HA-tagged GNL from transgenic plants expressing a functional GNLHA 542

transgene from a GNL promoter fragment in the gnc gnl background 543

(pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl Fig 11B) Through subsequent ChIP-PCR studies 544

targeting selected regions upstream from GNC GNL and GATA17 we could 545

confirm this binding through independent analyses (Fig 11C) Thus LLM-546

domain B-GATA factors may directly regulate their own expression as well as 547

that of other family members 548

549

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

19

DISCUSSION 550

In the present study we have characterized the six-membered family of LLM-551

domain B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Whereas the family has diverged when 552

compared between Arabidopsis tomato barley and Brachypodium a clear 553

conservation of this protein family can be observed within the Brassicaceae 554

family (Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014) Within the Brassicaceae GNC and 555

GNL GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and GATA17L form closely 556

related LLM-domain B-GATA pairs In a previous study we had comparatively 557

analyzed transgenic Arabidopsis lines expressing different members of the 558

LLM-domain B-GATA gene family from Arabidopsis barley and tomato and 559

concluded that these genes are functionally redundant at the biochemical 560

level since their overexpression resulted in highly similar phenotypes 561

(Behringer et al 2014) Several of the phenotypes analyzed here namely 562

greening (Fig 1D-F) hypocotyl elongation (Fig 4) plant height branching 563

patterns (Fig 9) branch angles (Fig 9 and Fig S9) silique length seed set 564

(Fig S10) flowering time (Fig 10) as well as senescence (Fig 8) are 565

strongest in the gata quintuple mutant and weaker or in some cases not even 566

apparent in the less complex gata mutant combinations Thus in line with this 567

previous study our present analysis shows that the LLM-domain B-GATA 568

genes from Arabidopsis have a shared biological function in the control of 569

multiple developmental pathways 570

Due to the high complexity of the available range of single double triple 571

quadruple and quintuple mutants we restricted many of our phenotypic 572

analyses to the gnc gnl double the complementary triple and the quintuple 573

mutants It can nevertheless be suggested based on the presently available 574

data that some phenotypes are predominantly controlled by a single LLM-575

domain B-GATA or rather an LLM-domain B-GATA gene pair Phyllotactic 576

patterning as assessed here in the inflorescence is impaired in the gata triple 577

but not in the gnc gnl double mutant (Fig 7) Similarly the increases in floral 578

organ numbers are already very prominent in the gata17 gata17l double 579

mutants and not much more enhanced in the gata triple or quintuple mutant 580

that includes the gata17 gata17l mutations (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) Thus 581

the LLM-domain B-GATA genes have shared overlapping but also distinct 582

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

20

roles in the control of plant development The fact that GATA15 gene function 583

is not impaired in the selected GATA15 gene insertion allele does not allow us 584

to draw any direct conclusions on the biological function of this gene based on 585

the data presented here Furthermore the fact that the mutant alleles of 586

GATA16 and GATA17 used in the complex mutants are only partially 587

defective in GATA gene expression could suggest that even stronger 588

phenotypes may be observed if loss-of-function alleles were used The two 589

strong alleles for GATA15 (gata15-2) and GATA17 (gata17-2) isolated here 590

but analyzed only as single mutants may help in the future to understand the 591

biological function of these GATA genes at further depth 592

It is interesting that the overexpression lines and the mutants of these GATA 593

genes frequently have antagonistic phenotypes This study in combination 594

with a previous study identifies such antagonistically regulated phenotypes in 595

the control of greening hypocotyl elongation branch angle formation 596

flowering time and senescence (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 597

Particularly in the case of transcription factors where the loss-of-function or 598

overexpression may affect the expression of many downstream targets genes 599

and developmental responses triggered by these target genes one may not 600

expect such a clear antagonistic relationship between mutants with reduced 601

gene functions and the overexpressors In view of the fact that 602

overexpressors likely also control the expression of genes that are normally 603

not targeted by this transcription factor when expressed from their native 604

promoter (off-targets) this observation is even more striking It may suggest 605

that the GATAs examined here control developmental responses in a dosage-606

dependent manner together with other critical factors In this context the 607

presence and abundance of the GATAs would just modulate the response but 608

would by itself not be sufficient to trigger it Further analyses will be required 609

to gain a more detailed understanding of the mode of action of the LLM-610

domain B-GATA factors in the control of gene expression 611

We had previously shown that the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 612

repress flowering since their loss-of-function mutants and overexpressors 613

displayed an early and late flowering phenotype respectively when plants 614

were grown in long-day conditions (Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) 615

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

21

We furthermore showed that the control of flowering is partially mediated by 616

the flowering time regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION 617

OF CONSTANS1) which acts downstream from GNC and GNL and whose 618

promoter can be directly bound by GNC and GNL (Richter et al 2013) In line 619

with these previous observations we show here that the complex GATA gene 620

mutants flower even earlier than the gnc gnl mutant further substantiating our 621

conclusion that LLM-domain B-GATAs are flowering time regulators in 622

Arabidopsis (Fig 10B and Fig S11) Surprisingly the complex gata mutants 623

flowered late when grown in short day conditions and their phenotype was 624

thereby antagonistic to the phenotype observed in long days (Fig 10C and 625

Fig S9) The reason for this antagonistic flowering time behavior remains to 626

be resolved but a complex scenario may be envisioned We also do not want 627

to rule out that physiological parameters become limiting in the induction of 628

flowering in the gata mutants Long term defects as a result of their reduced 629

greening may play a limiting role during the extended growth in short days 630

with short illumination periods that are not limiting when plants are grown in 631

long days 632

Several of our phenotypic analyses suggested that the LLM-domain B-GATAs 633

act in concert to control specific phenotypes The fact that at least some of the 634

phenotypes were most pronounced in the quintuple mutant and not apparent 635

or only weak in the less complex mutants suggests that the LLM-domain B-636

GATAs may cross-regulate their expression and that presence and absence 637

of one GATA could interfere with the abundance of other GATA family 638

members We have analyzed this hypothesis here by examining the 639

expression of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 640

GATA17L in the gnc gnl mutant and in the GNL overexpression line (Fig 11A) 641

In both cases we found the expression of three of the four analyzed genes to 642

be differentially regulated in the two genetic backgrounds suggesting that the 643

GATAs can cross-regulate their gene expression and supporting again the 644

hypothesis that the GATAs have a repressive activity on the transcription of 645

the other GATA genes Further support for such a hypothetical cross-646

regulation came from a ChIP-seq analysis with GNL where we observed a 647

strong binding of GNL when expressed from its own promoter to the three 648

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

9

To examine a possible redundant function among the B-GATAs in the control 247

of greening we analyzed greening and chlorophyll content in 14 day-old light-248

grown gata mutant plants (Fig 1D and E) Although there was no indication 249

for a defect in greening in gata17 gata17l or in the triple mutant we found that 250

the greening defect of gnc gnl was further enhanced in the gnc gnl gata17 251

gata17l quadruple mutant and even more in the quintuple mutant (Fig 1D and 252

E) At the same time greening defects were not obvious in any of the gata 253

single mutants (Fig 1E) In the case of the gata15 and gata17 alleles this 254

was not due to the fact that weak alleles had been chosen for the complex 255

mutants since also the severe alleles gata15-2 and gata17-2 showed no 256

reduction in chlorophyll levels when compared to the wild type (Fig 1E) 257

The further reduction in chlorophyll accumulation in the quintuple mutant was 258

also apparent when we analyzed chlorophyll abundance by fluorescence 259

microscopy where we found reduced chloroplast fluorescence when 260

comparing the quintuple mutant to gnc gnl (Fig 1F) Furthermore we noted 261

that the greening defect gradually disappeared in gnc gnl mutants after the 262

seedling stage but remained apparent in the quintuple mutants also in adult 263

plants (Fig S4) Taken together this suggested that all mutated GATA genes 264

participate in the control of greening and chlorophyll accumulation and that 265

the defects of mutants defective in a single gene may be suppressed by the 266

presence of the other family members 267

268

Gene expression regulation of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 269

had been in the focus of several studies based on the strong regulation of 270

their gene expression by light and CK (Bi et al 2005 Naito et al 2007 271

Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) We were therefore interested in 272

evaluating to what extent light and CK regulate the expression of the other 273

GATA genes In the case of light regulation we found that far-red red as well 274

as blue light strongly induced the expression of GNL and to some extent also 275

the expression of GNC (Fig 2) In blue light we noted a subtle but significant 276

induction of GATA15 and GATA16 (Fig 2C) Importantly this regulation was 277

not observed in the red and far-red light receptor mutant phyA phyB or in the 278

blue light receptor mutant cry1 cry2 (Fig 2) Furthermore light-induced gene 279

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

10

expression changes in red light were impaired in the quadruple mutant for the 280

PHYTOCHROME INTERACTING FACTOR (PIF) genes PIF1 PIF3 PIF4 281

and PIF5 (pifq) indicating that the light-dependent regulation in red light was 282

mediated by the phytochrome and PIF signaling pathways (Fig S5) (Leivar et 283

al 2008) 284

The CK experiments indicated that CK induces the expression of all six GATA 285

genes (Fig 3) With an about three-fold increase in transcript abundance this 286

induction was strongest for GNL but could be observed for each of the other 287

GATA genes after a one to four hour CK treatment (Fig 3) Thus CK 288

promotes the expression of all six LLM-domain B-GATAs 289

290

Mutants of LLM-domain B-GATAs are impaired in hypocotyl elongation 291

Due to the strong regulation particularly of GNL but also of GNC in far-red red 292

and blue light conditions we examined the contribution of the GATA genes to 293

hypocotyl elongation by analyzing mutant seedlings in the different light 294

conditions in two different light intensities (Fig 4) Here we found that 295

quintuple mutant seedlings had a shorter hypocotyl than wild type seedlings in 296

white light as well as in red far-red and blue light (Fig 4) Notably these 297

phenotypes were not apparent or at least not significant in the gnc gnl 298

double mutant or the triple mutant suggesting that the respective other GATA 299

genes may contribute to the hypocotyl elongation phenotype in these 300

backgrounds (Fig 4) At the same time hypocotyl length of dark-grown 301

mutant seedlings was indistinguishable in all genotypes from that observed in 302

the wild type (Fig 4E and G) The short hypocotyl phenotype of the GATA 303

gene mutants was also interesting because we previously observed that the 304

LLM-domain B-GATA overexpressors had a longer hypocotyl than the wild 305

type when grown in white light (Behringer et al 2014) When analyzed in the 306

different light conditions we found the long hypocotyl phenotype of the GNL 307

overexpression line (GNLox) was also present in far-red and blue light but 308

interestingly not in red light where hypocotyls were even shorter than in the 309

wild type or the mutants when grown in weak red light conditions (Fig 4) 310

311

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

11

GATA gene mutants have differential gene expression defects The 312

strong induction of GNL gene expression by CK was already repeatedly 313

described and is the reason for the genersquos original designation CGA1 314

(CYTOKININ-INDUCED GATA1) (Naito et al 2007 Kollmer et al 2011) In 315

order to examine the role of the GATA genes in CK-responsive gene 316

expression we performed microarray experiments with 14 day-old wild type 317

plants gnc gnl and triple mutants as well as quintuple mutants treated for 60 318

min with the CK 6-BA (6-benzylaminopurine) or a corresponding mock solvent 319

control (Fig 5 and Fig 6 Supplemental Tables S1 and S2) We then 320

analyzed the resulting data with regard to differences in basal gene 321

expression (Fig 5) and with regard to gene expression differences after the 322

CK treatment in comparison to the mock control (Fig 6) For technical 323

reasons the experiment was conducted in two rounds the first experiment 324

included the Col-0 (1) wild type control the gnc gnl double mutant and the 325

quintuple mutant the second experiment included an independent Col-0 (2) 326

wild type control and the triple mutant When we examined the expression of 327

the CK-induced ARRs (A-TYPE RESPONSE REGULATORS) of the CK 328

signaling pathway we could confirm that the respective CK induction 329

experiments were comparably efficient between the two experiments and in 330

all genotypes tested (Fig S6A) We also examined the microarray dataset 331

with regard to the expression of a previously defined so-called ldquogolden listrdquo of 332

CK-regulated genes (Bhargava et al 2013) Over 70 of the 331 entities 333

derived from this list were significantly CK-regulated in our experiments 334

(Supplemental Table S3) When applying a two-fold expression change as 335

additional filter criterion 71 of these 331 entities were identified as up- (Col-0 336

1 and Col-0 2) and 39 (Col-0 1) and 25 entities (Col-0 2) as down-regulated 337

after CK treatment (Fig S6B and Supplemental Table S3) We thus 338

concluded that the CK treatments in both experiments were similarly efficient 339

and that the data sets could be used for comparative analyses 340

The comparison of the basal gene expression profiles of the wild type 341

samples and the mutants indicated that the (untreated) quintuple mutant 342

seedlings had by far the largest number of differentially regulated genes with 343

4722 down-regulated and 976 up-regulated entities when compared to the 344

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

12

Col-0 (1) wild type (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) Furthermore the gnc 345

gnl double mutant contained 2458 down- and 294 up-regulated entities 346

respectively (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) In comparison the number 347

of differentially expressed genes was comparatively minor in the triple mutant 348

which had only 323 down- and 278 up-regulated entities in this particular 349

experiment and selected physiological growth conditions (Fig 5) 350

The comparatively strong gene expression differences in the gnc gnl double 351

and the quintuple mutants and the fact that both mutants shared the gnc gnl 352

loss-of-function at the genetic level was reflected by the large overlap 353

between the differentially expressed gene sets of the two genotypes 354

Specifically 1922 of the 2458 down-regulated entities from gnc gnl were also 355

down-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 5B) and 98 of the 294 entities 356

up-regulated in gnc gnl were also up-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 357

5B) Conversely the overlap in gene expression defects between the triple 358

mutant and the quintuple mutant was higher than that between the triple 359

mutant and gnc gnl (Fig 5B) We therefore concluded that the gene 360

expression differences between the different GATA gene mutants was 361

strongest in the quintuple mutant and that the strong increase in the number 362

of differentially regulated genes exceeded by far the differences seen in the 363

gnc gnl double mutant and the triple mutant This supported our conclusion 364

from the phenotypic analyses that the GATA genes act in a functionally 365

redundant manner 366

Since we had observed increased gene expression of all six GATA genes 367

after CK-treatment we expected that CK-induced gene expression may be 368

compromised in the gata mutants (Fig 6) Indeed of the 996 entities that 369

were down-regulated after CK-treatment in the wild type (Col-0 1) only 173 370

(18 ) and 89 (9 ) remained CK-regulated in the quintuple and gnc gnl 371

mutant respectively (Fig 6A and Supplemental Table S2) At the same time 372

of the 188 entities that were down-regulated after CK treatment in the wild 373

type sample of the second experiment (Col-0 2) 83 (44 ) remained CK-374

regulated in the gata triple mutant (Fig 6B) The differential effect on gene 375

expression between the different mutants was less pronounced when 376

examining the CK-induced genes Here 49 (quintuple mutant) 59 (gnc 377

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

13

gnl) and 63 (triple mutant) of the CK-induced entities from the respective 378

wild types remained CK-regulated in the mutants (Fig 6A and B) In summary 379

we concluded that CK-regulated gene expression is impaired in the GATA 380

gene mutants 381

382

GATA gene mutants are defective in CK-regulated developmental 383

processes Based on the strong defects of gata mutants in CK-regulated 384

gene expression we searched for phenotypes that could be explained by 385

defects in CK response CK signaling was described as a regulator of 386

phyllotactic patterning in the shoot apical meristem of Arabidopsis (Besnard et 387

al 2014) In line with a role of the LLM-domain B-GATA genes in this process 388

we observed frequent aberrations from normal phyllotactic patterning in flower 389

positioning in triple and quintuple mutant inflorescences (Fig 7) Quantitative 390

analyses revealed aberrations from the canonical angle of ~1375deg in about 391

~30 of the petioles in triple and quintuple inflorescences (Fig 7D) At the 392

same time this patterning defect was not apparent in the gnc gnl double 393

mutant Since we also did not observe a quantitative increase in the severity 394

of this phenotype between the triple and the quintuple mutant we concluded 395

that GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L may be responsible for this phenotype 396

(Fig 7D) 397

Leaf senescence is another CK-regulated process (Hwang et al 2012) In the 398

wild type CK levels are reduced during senescence and positive or negative 399

interference with the decrease in CK levels can promote and delay 400

senescence respectively (Hwang et al 2012) Senescence can be induced 401

by shifting light-grown plants to the dark and we had previously already shown 402

that leaf senescence is delayed in overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-403

GATAs (Behringer et al 2014) To examine possible senescence defects in 404

the gata mutants we floated leaves of wild type and mutant plants in the dark 405

on a mock solution or on a solution containing 005 microM or 01 microM 6-BA (Fig 406

8A ndash F) (Weaver and Amasino 2001) In line with the expectation that the 407

presence of CK in the medium would suppress the senescence process we 408

observed decreased senescence in CK-treated wild type leaves which we 409

quantitatively assessed by measuring chlorophyll levels in the mock- and CK-410

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

14

treated leaves (Fig 8F) Here we found that the effects of the senescence 411

treatment were less efficiently suppressed by CK treatments in the gnc gnl 412

double and in the quintuple mutant than in the wild type or the triple mutant 413

(Fig 8A - F) Similarly we observed a stronger effect on the decreases in 414

chlorophyll and total protein levels in the gnc gnl as well as the quintuple 415

mutant when we transferred light-grown plants for four days to the dark (Fig 416

8G ndash I) As previously reported GNL overexpressing plants (GNLox) had 417

senescence phenotypes that were antagonistic to the ones observed with the 418

mutants (Fig 8) (Behringer et al 2014) In the case of the leaf floating assay 419

CK-treatment had a stronger effect on greening and chlorophyll abundance in 420

GNLox than in the wild type (Fig 8A ndash F) When we transferred plants from 421

the light to the dark GNLox seedlings remained visibly green and did not 422

display the strong decrease in total protein abundance that we observed in 423

the wild type or the GATA gene mutants (Fig 8G ndash I) We thus concluded that 424

GATA gene mutants and overexpressors have antagonistic effects with 425

regard to the regulation of senescence and that GNC and GNL contribute 426

particularly strongly to this phenotype 427

CK induces greening in light-grown seedlings (Kobayashi et al 2012) To 428

examine to what extent CK can induce chlorophyll accumulation in the gata 429

mutants we grew plants for two weeks in constant light on medium containing 430

CK (5 nM BA) or a corresponding CK-free medium As expected chlorophyll 431

content was increased in wild type plants but this increase was neither 432

significant in the gnc gnl nor the triple or the quintuple mutants (Fig S7) We 433

thus concluded that the GATA factors are required for CK-induced greening in 434

Arabidopsis seedlings 435

It was previously reported that hypocotyl elongation could be repressed by 436

incubating dark-grown seedlings in the presence of CK (Su and Howell 1995) 437

Since the GATA gene mutants had displayed a hypocotyl elongation defect in 438

light-grown seedlings (Fig 4) we also explored the link between hypocotyl 439

elongation and CK However when we tested the effects of CK on hypocotyl 440

elongation in dark-grown seedlings we did not detect any significant 441

differences in the response between the different genotypes tested (Fig S8) 442

It is thus unlikely that the GATA genes participate in this elongation response 443

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

15

Branching is another phenotype that has been attributed to defects in CK 444

biosynthesis and response (El-Showk et al 2013) When we analyzed the 445

general habitus of the quintuple mutants we noted that they had an increased 446

number of secondary branches that was combined with a reduced plant 447

height (Fig 9A - C) Occasionally we also observed the outgrowth of 448

inflorescences in the axils of lateral inflorescences in the mutants whereas we 449

had not noted this phenotype in the wild type (Fig 9D and E) A quantitative 450

analysis of these phenotypes over all gata mutant phenotypes revealed that 451

the number of first and second order lateral branches increased with 452

increasing mutant complexity (Fig 9B) Here we observed strong effects 453

already in the gata17 gata17l mutant as well as the gnc gnl double mutant but 454

strongest defects in the triple and the quintuple mutant thus all five GATA 455

genes may contribute to this phenotype (Fig 9B) At the same time plant 456

height was reduced to a significant but still minor level in these mutants 457

suggesting that decreases in plant height which may have indirect 458

consequences on the general plant habitus and branching are not the 459

primary cause for altered branching patterns in the gata mutants (Fig 9C) It 460

is further important to note that the higher order GATA gene mutants initiated 461

fewer vegetative buds but had a higher number of growing buds as reflected 462

by the increased branch numbers (Fig 9F) Thus axillary bud formation is 463

promoted and bud outgrowth is repressed by the GATAs in the wild type 464

Another phenotype that became apparent during our analysis of the gata 465

mutant plant habitus was an increase in the angle formed between the 466

primary inflorescence and the lateral inflorescences (Fig 9G and H Fig S9) 467

gata mutants had a decreased angle formed between the primary 468

inflorescence and lateral inflorescences and this phenotype was strongest in 469

the quintuple mutant and intermediate in the gnc gnl and triple mutants (Fig 470

9G and H Fig S9) Interestingly we had previously observed increased 471

branch angles in GATA overexpression lines such as GNLox (Fig S9) 472

(Behringer et al 2014) We thus concluded that GATA gene mutants and 473

overexpressors antagonistically regulate branch angles in Arabidopsis 474

475

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

16

GATA genes regulate petal and sepal numbers as well as silique length 476

CK signaling has recently been implicated in the control of floral development 477

(Han et al 2014) When we analyzed gata mutant flowers in more detail we 478

noted with interest aberrations in floral organ numbers in comparison to the 479

wild type (Fig 10A) Whereas wild type flowers have generally four sepals 480

and four petals and only rarely deviate from this pattern (in our study in 481

around 2 of the cases) a strong increase in flowers with more than four 482

(generally five in rare cases six) petals and sepals became apparent in the 483

higher order gata mutants (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) In the gata17 gata17l 484

mutants we observed flowers with more than four sepals and petals in 12 of 485

all flowers and this number was slightly enhanced in the triple mutant (13 486

petals) and the quintuple mutant (14 petals) (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) 487

Importantly the single mutants with the clearest apparent effect were the 488

gata17 and gata17l mutants and inversely mutations in GNC and GNL 489

contributed only to a minor extent to this phenotype (Fig S10A) In summary 490

this analysis revealed that GATA17 and GATA17L make a particularly strong 491

contribution to the floral morphology phenotype of the gata mutants 492

Since we had previously noted that overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-493

GATAs have short siliques and a reduced number of seeds per silique we 494

also analyzed silique length and seed set in the gata mutants (Fig S10B - D) 495

In line with an antagonistic regulation of these traits in the gata mutants we 496

measured significant increases in seed set in the siliques of the gnc gnl the 497

triple as well as the quintuple mutants and we detected significant increases 498

in silique length in all mutant backgrounds (Fig S10B - D) We thus concluded 499

that the GATA genes repress silique elongation and seed set in the wild type 500

at least to a minor extent A differential contribution of individual GATAs to 501

these phenotypes could however not be resolved here 502

503

GATA gene mutants have antagonistic effects on flowering time in long 504

and short days Accelerated flowering in plants grown under long-day 505

conditions was another phenotype previously described for gnc gnl mutants 506

(Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) Conversely overexpression of the 507

LLM-domain B-GATAs causes a strong delay in flowering (Richter et al 508

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

17

2010 Richter et al 2013 Behringer et al 2014) To examine the contribution 509

of the other GATA factors to the flowering time phenotype we grew the gata 510

mutant series in long day and short day conditions with a 16 hr and 8 hr light 511

period respectively (Fig 10B and C Fig S11) Interestingly we observed a 512

gradual acceleration of flowering in long day-grown plants that was weakest in 513

the single mutants more pronounced in the double triple quadruple mutants 514

and strongest in the quintuple mutants (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) 515

We thus concluded that all LLM-domain B-GATA genes examined here may 516

contribute to the repression of flowering in long day-grown plants 517

Interestingly the effects of the reduced GATA gene function on flowering time 518

in short day conditions were antagonistic to those observed in long day-grown 519

plants in that the complex GATA gene mutants flowered much later than the 520

wild type or the less complex mutant combinations when flowering was 521

counted in days (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) We thus concluded that 522

the LLM-domain B-GATAs factors regulate flowering time in long and short 523

day conditions but in view of the antagonistic nature of this regulation that 524

their contribution to flowering time control may be complex 525

526

Cross-regulation of GATA gene expression Since several of our genetic 527

analyses had suggested a functional redundancy between the GATA genes 528

we looked for evidences of a cross-regulation of GATA gene expression in the 529

gnc gnl double mutant background There we detected indeed an increased 530

transcript abundance of GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 531

mutant which could be compensatory for the loss of GNC and GNL (Fig 11A) 532

At the same time GATA15 GATA16 and GATA17L gene expression levels 533

were significantly reduced in GNL overexpression lines (GNLox) suggesting 534

that GNL may regulate the expression of these genes 535

Since these observations indicated that molecular mechanisms may exist that 536

compensate for the loss of individual LLM-domain B-GATA genes eg in the 537

gnc gnl mutants we examined the binding of GNL to the LLM-domain GATA 538

gene promoters after ChIP-seq analysis (chromatin immunoprecipitation 539

followed by DNA sequencing) Here we found that at least three of the six 540

LLM-domain B-GATA genes were bound by GNL after immunoprecipitation of 541

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

18

HA-tagged GNL from transgenic plants expressing a functional GNLHA 542

transgene from a GNL promoter fragment in the gnc gnl background 543

(pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl Fig 11B) Through subsequent ChIP-PCR studies 544

targeting selected regions upstream from GNC GNL and GATA17 we could 545

confirm this binding through independent analyses (Fig 11C) Thus LLM-546

domain B-GATA factors may directly regulate their own expression as well as 547

that of other family members 548

549

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

19

DISCUSSION 550

In the present study we have characterized the six-membered family of LLM-551

domain B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Whereas the family has diverged when 552

compared between Arabidopsis tomato barley and Brachypodium a clear 553

conservation of this protein family can be observed within the Brassicaceae 554

family (Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014) Within the Brassicaceae GNC and 555

GNL GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and GATA17L form closely 556

related LLM-domain B-GATA pairs In a previous study we had comparatively 557

analyzed transgenic Arabidopsis lines expressing different members of the 558

LLM-domain B-GATA gene family from Arabidopsis barley and tomato and 559

concluded that these genes are functionally redundant at the biochemical 560

level since their overexpression resulted in highly similar phenotypes 561

(Behringer et al 2014) Several of the phenotypes analyzed here namely 562

greening (Fig 1D-F) hypocotyl elongation (Fig 4) plant height branching 563

patterns (Fig 9) branch angles (Fig 9 and Fig S9) silique length seed set 564

(Fig S10) flowering time (Fig 10) as well as senescence (Fig 8) are 565

strongest in the gata quintuple mutant and weaker or in some cases not even 566

apparent in the less complex gata mutant combinations Thus in line with this 567

previous study our present analysis shows that the LLM-domain B-GATA 568

genes from Arabidopsis have a shared biological function in the control of 569

multiple developmental pathways 570

Due to the high complexity of the available range of single double triple 571

quadruple and quintuple mutants we restricted many of our phenotypic 572

analyses to the gnc gnl double the complementary triple and the quintuple 573

mutants It can nevertheless be suggested based on the presently available 574

data that some phenotypes are predominantly controlled by a single LLM-575

domain B-GATA or rather an LLM-domain B-GATA gene pair Phyllotactic 576

patterning as assessed here in the inflorescence is impaired in the gata triple 577

but not in the gnc gnl double mutant (Fig 7) Similarly the increases in floral 578

organ numbers are already very prominent in the gata17 gata17l double 579

mutants and not much more enhanced in the gata triple or quintuple mutant 580

that includes the gata17 gata17l mutations (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) Thus 581

the LLM-domain B-GATA genes have shared overlapping but also distinct 582

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

20

roles in the control of plant development The fact that GATA15 gene function 583

is not impaired in the selected GATA15 gene insertion allele does not allow us 584

to draw any direct conclusions on the biological function of this gene based on 585

the data presented here Furthermore the fact that the mutant alleles of 586

GATA16 and GATA17 used in the complex mutants are only partially 587

defective in GATA gene expression could suggest that even stronger 588

phenotypes may be observed if loss-of-function alleles were used The two 589

strong alleles for GATA15 (gata15-2) and GATA17 (gata17-2) isolated here 590

but analyzed only as single mutants may help in the future to understand the 591

biological function of these GATA genes at further depth 592

It is interesting that the overexpression lines and the mutants of these GATA 593

genes frequently have antagonistic phenotypes This study in combination 594

with a previous study identifies such antagonistically regulated phenotypes in 595

the control of greening hypocotyl elongation branch angle formation 596

flowering time and senescence (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 597

Particularly in the case of transcription factors where the loss-of-function or 598

overexpression may affect the expression of many downstream targets genes 599

and developmental responses triggered by these target genes one may not 600

expect such a clear antagonistic relationship between mutants with reduced 601

gene functions and the overexpressors In view of the fact that 602

overexpressors likely also control the expression of genes that are normally 603

not targeted by this transcription factor when expressed from their native 604

promoter (off-targets) this observation is even more striking It may suggest 605

that the GATAs examined here control developmental responses in a dosage-606

dependent manner together with other critical factors In this context the 607

presence and abundance of the GATAs would just modulate the response but 608

would by itself not be sufficient to trigger it Further analyses will be required 609

to gain a more detailed understanding of the mode of action of the LLM-610

domain B-GATA factors in the control of gene expression 611

We had previously shown that the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 612

repress flowering since their loss-of-function mutants and overexpressors 613

displayed an early and late flowering phenotype respectively when plants 614

were grown in long-day conditions (Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) 615

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

21

We furthermore showed that the control of flowering is partially mediated by 616

the flowering time regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION 617

OF CONSTANS1) which acts downstream from GNC and GNL and whose 618

promoter can be directly bound by GNC and GNL (Richter et al 2013) In line 619

with these previous observations we show here that the complex GATA gene 620

mutants flower even earlier than the gnc gnl mutant further substantiating our 621

conclusion that LLM-domain B-GATAs are flowering time regulators in 622

Arabidopsis (Fig 10B and Fig S11) Surprisingly the complex gata mutants 623

flowered late when grown in short day conditions and their phenotype was 624

thereby antagonistic to the phenotype observed in long days (Fig 10C and 625

Fig S9) The reason for this antagonistic flowering time behavior remains to 626

be resolved but a complex scenario may be envisioned We also do not want 627

to rule out that physiological parameters become limiting in the induction of 628

flowering in the gata mutants Long term defects as a result of their reduced 629

greening may play a limiting role during the extended growth in short days 630

with short illumination periods that are not limiting when plants are grown in 631

long days 632

Several of our phenotypic analyses suggested that the LLM-domain B-GATAs 633

act in concert to control specific phenotypes The fact that at least some of the 634

phenotypes were most pronounced in the quintuple mutant and not apparent 635

or only weak in the less complex mutants suggests that the LLM-domain B-636

GATAs may cross-regulate their expression and that presence and absence 637

of one GATA could interfere with the abundance of other GATA family 638

members We have analyzed this hypothesis here by examining the 639

expression of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 640

GATA17L in the gnc gnl mutant and in the GNL overexpression line (Fig 11A) 641

In both cases we found the expression of three of the four analyzed genes to 642

be differentially regulated in the two genetic backgrounds suggesting that the 643

GATAs can cross-regulate their gene expression and supporting again the 644

hypothesis that the GATAs have a repressive activity on the transcription of 645

the other GATA genes Further support for such a hypothetical cross-646

regulation came from a ChIP-seq analysis with GNL where we observed a 647

strong binding of GNL when expressed from its own promoter to the three 648

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

10

expression changes in red light were impaired in the quadruple mutant for the 280

PHYTOCHROME INTERACTING FACTOR (PIF) genes PIF1 PIF3 PIF4 281

and PIF5 (pifq) indicating that the light-dependent regulation in red light was 282

mediated by the phytochrome and PIF signaling pathways (Fig S5) (Leivar et 283

al 2008) 284

The CK experiments indicated that CK induces the expression of all six GATA 285

genes (Fig 3) With an about three-fold increase in transcript abundance this 286

induction was strongest for GNL but could be observed for each of the other 287

GATA genes after a one to four hour CK treatment (Fig 3) Thus CK 288

promotes the expression of all six LLM-domain B-GATAs 289

290

Mutants of LLM-domain B-GATAs are impaired in hypocotyl elongation 291

Due to the strong regulation particularly of GNL but also of GNC in far-red red 292

and blue light conditions we examined the contribution of the GATA genes to 293

hypocotyl elongation by analyzing mutant seedlings in the different light 294

conditions in two different light intensities (Fig 4) Here we found that 295

quintuple mutant seedlings had a shorter hypocotyl than wild type seedlings in 296

white light as well as in red far-red and blue light (Fig 4) Notably these 297

phenotypes were not apparent or at least not significant in the gnc gnl 298

double mutant or the triple mutant suggesting that the respective other GATA 299

genes may contribute to the hypocotyl elongation phenotype in these 300

backgrounds (Fig 4) At the same time hypocotyl length of dark-grown 301

mutant seedlings was indistinguishable in all genotypes from that observed in 302

the wild type (Fig 4E and G) The short hypocotyl phenotype of the GATA 303

gene mutants was also interesting because we previously observed that the 304

LLM-domain B-GATA overexpressors had a longer hypocotyl than the wild 305

type when grown in white light (Behringer et al 2014) When analyzed in the 306

different light conditions we found the long hypocotyl phenotype of the GNL 307

overexpression line (GNLox) was also present in far-red and blue light but 308

interestingly not in red light where hypocotyls were even shorter than in the 309

wild type or the mutants when grown in weak red light conditions (Fig 4) 310

311

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

11

GATA gene mutants have differential gene expression defects The 312

strong induction of GNL gene expression by CK was already repeatedly 313

described and is the reason for the genersquos original designation CGA1 314

(CYTOKININ-INDUCED GATA1) (Naito et al 2007 Kollmer et al 2011) In 315

order to examine the role of the GATA genes in CK-responsive gene 316

expression we performed microarray experiments with 14 day-old wild type 317

plants gnc gnl and triple mutants as well as quintuple mutants treated for 60 318

min with the CK 6-BA (6-benzylaminopurine) or a corresponding mock solvent 319

control (Fig 5 and Fig 6 Supplemental Tables S1 and S2) We then 320

analyzed the resulting data with regard to differences in basal gene 321

expression (Fig 5) and with regard to gene expression differences after the 322

CK treatment in comparison to the mock control (Fig 6) For technical 323

reasons the experiment was conducted in two rounds the first experiment 324

included the Col-0 (1) wild type control the gnc gnl double mutant and the 325

quintuple mutant the second experiment included an independent Col-0 (2) 326

wild type control and the triple mutant When we examined the expression of 327

the CK-induced ARRs (A-TYPE RESPONSE REGULATORS) of the CK 328

signaling pathway we could confirm that the respective CK induction 329

experiments were comparably efficient between the two experiments and in 330

all genotypes tested (Fig S6A) We also examined the microarray dataset 331

with regard to the expression of a previously defined so-called ldquogolden listrdquo of 332

CK-regulated genes (Bhargava et al 2013) Over 70 of the 331 entities 333

derived from this list were significantly CK-regulated in our experiments 334

(Supplemental Table S3) When applying a two-fold expression change as 335

additional filter criterion 71 of these 331 entities were identified as up- (Col-0 336

1 and Col-0 2) and 39 (Col-0 1) and 25 entities (Col-0 2) as down-regulated 337

after CK treatment (Fig S6B and Supplemental Table S3) We thus 338

concluded that the CK treatments in both experiments were similarly efficient 339

and that the data sets could be used for comparative analyses 340

The comparison of the basal gene expression profiles of the wild type 341

samples and the mutants indicated that the (untreated) quintuple mutant 342

seedlings had by far the largest number of differentially regulated genes with 343

4722 down-regulated and 976 up-regulated entities when compared to the 344

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

12

Col-0 (1) wild type (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) Furthermore the gnc 345

gnl double mutant contained 2458 down- and 294 up-regulated entities 346

respectively (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) In comparison the number 347

of differentially expressed genes was comparatively minor in the triple mutant 348

which had only 323 down- and 278 up-regulated entities in this particular 349

experiment and selected physiological growth conditions (Fig 5) 350

The comparatively strong gene expression differences in the gnc gnl double 351

and the quintuple mutants and the fact that both mutants shared the gnc gnl 352

loss-of-function at the genetic level was reflected by the large overlap 353

between the differentially expressed gene sets of the two genotypes 354

Specifically 1922 of the 2458 down-regulated entities from gnc gnl were also 355

down-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 5B) and 98 of the 294 entities 356

up-regulated in gnc gnl were also up-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 357

5B) Conversely the overlap in gene expression defects between the triple 358

mutant and the quintuple mutant was higher than that between the triple 359

mutant and gnc gnl (Fig 5B) We therefore concluded that the gene 360

expression differences between the different GATA gene mutants was 361

strongest in the quintuple mutant and that the strong increase in the number 362

of differentially regulated genes exceeded by far the differences seen in the 363

gnc gnl double mutant and the triple mutant This supported our conclusion 364

from the phenotypic analyses that the GATA genes act in a functionally 365

redundant manner 366

Since we had observed increased gene expression of all six GATA genes 367

after CK-treatment we expected that CK-induced gene expression may be 368

compromised in the gata mutants (Fig 6) Indeed of the 996 entities that 369

were down-regulated after CK-treatment in the wild type (Col-0 1) only 173 370

(18 ) and 89 (9 ) remained CK-regulated in the quintuple and gnc gnl 371

mutant respectively (Fig 6A and Supplemental Table S2) At the same time 372

of the 188 entities that were down-regulated after CK treatment in the wild 373

type sample of the second experiment (Col-0 2) 83 (44 ) remained CK-374

regulated in the gata triple mutant (Fig 6B) The differential effect on gene 375

expression between the different mutants was less pronounced when 376

examining the CK-induced genes Here 49 (quintuple mutant) 59 (gnc 377

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

13

gnl) and 63 (triple mutant) of the CK-induced entities from the respective 378

wild types remained CK-regulated in the mutants (Fig 6A and B) In summary 379

we concluded that CK-regulated gene expression is impaired in the GATA 380

gene mutants 381

382

GATA gene mutants are defective in CK-regulated developmental 383

processes Based on the strong defects of gata mutants in CK-regulated 384

gene expression we searched for phenotypes that could be explained by 385

defects in CK response CK signaling was described as a regulator of 386

phyllotactic patterning in the shoot apical meristem of Arabidopsis (Besnard et 387

al 2014) In line with a role of the LLM-domain B-GATA genes in this process 388

we observed frequent aberrations from normal phyllotactic patterning in flower 389

positioning in triple and quintuple mutant inflorescences (Fig 7) Quantitative 390

analyses revealed aberrations from the canonical angle of ~1375deg in about 391

~30 of the petioles in triple and quintuple inflorescences (Fig 7D) At the 392

same time this patterning defect was not apparent in the gnc gnl double 393

mutant Since we also did not observe a quantitative increase in the severity 394

of this phenotype between the triple and the quintuple mutant we concluded 395

that GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L may be responsible for this phenotype 396

(Fig 7D) 397

Leaf senescence is another CK-regulated process (Hwang et al 2012) In the 398

wild type CK levels are reduced during senescence and positive or negative 399

interference with the decrease in CK levels can promote and delay 400

senescence respectively (Hwang et al 2012) Senescence can be induced 401

by shifting light-grown plants to the dark and we had previously already shown 402

that leaf senescence is delayed in overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-403

GATAs (Behringer et al 2014) To examine possible senescence defects in 404

the gata mutants we floated leaves of wild type and mutant plants in the dark 405

on a mock solution or on a solution containing 005 microM or 01 microM 6-BA (Fig 406

8A ndash F) (Weaver and Amasino 2001) In line with the expectation that the 407

presence of CK in the medium would suppress the senescence process we 408

observed decreased senescence in CK-treated wild type leaves which we 409

quantitatively assessed by measuring chlorophyll levels in the mock- and CK-410

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

14

treated leaves (Fig 8F) Here we found that the effects of the senescence 411

treatment were less efficiently suppressed by CK treatments in the gnc gnl 412

double and in the quintuple mutant than in the wild type or the triple mutant 413

(Fig 8A - F) Similarly we observed a stronger effect on the decreases in 414

chlorophyll and total protein levels in the gnc gnl as well as the quintuple 415

mutant when we transferred light-grown plants for four days to the dark (Fig 416

8G ndash I) As previously reported GNL overexpressing plants (GNLox) had 417

senescence phenotypes that were antagonistic to the ones observed with the 418

mutants (Fig 8) (Behringer et al 2014) In the case of the leaf floating assay 419

CK-treatment had a stronger effect on greening and chlorophyll abundance in 420

GNLox than in the wild type (Fig 8A ndash F) When we transferred plants from 421

the light to the dark GNLox seedlings remained visibly green and did not 422

display the strong decrease in total protein abundance that we observed in 423

the wild type or the GATA gene mutants (Fig 8G ndash I) We thus concluded that 424

GATA gene mutants and overexpressors have antagonistic effects with 425

regard to the regulation of senescence and that GNC and GNL contribute 426

particularly strongly to this phenotype 427

CK induces greening in light-grown seedlings (Kobayashi et al 2012) To 428

examine to what extent CK can induce chlorophyll accumulation in the gata 429

mutants we grew plants for two weeks in constant light on medium containing 430

CK (5 nM BA) or a corresponding CK-free medium As expected chlorophyll 431

content was increased in wild type plants but this increase was neither 432

significant in the gnc gnl nor the triple or the quintuple mutants (Fig S7) We 433

thus concluded that the GATA factors are required for CK-induced greening in 434

Arabidopsis seedlings 435

It was previously reported that hypocotyl elongation could be repressed by 436

incubating dark-grown seedlings in the presence of CK (Su and Howell 1995) 437

Since the GATA gene mutants had displayed a hypocotyl elongation defect in 438

light-grown seedlings (Fig 4) we also explored the link between hypocotyl 439

elongation and CK However when we tested the effects of CK on hypocotyl 440

elongation in dark-grown seedlings we did not detect any significant 441

differences in the response between the different genotypes tested (Fig S8) 442

It is thus unlikely that the GATA genes participate in this elongation response 443

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

15

Branching is another phenotype that has been attributed to defects in CK 444

biosynthesis and response (El-Showk et al 2013) When we analyzed the 445

general habitus of the quintuple mutants we noted that they had an increased 446

number of secondary branches that was combined with a reduced plant 447

height (Fig 9A - C) Occasionally we also observed the outgrowth of 448

inflorescences in the axils of lateral inflorescences in the mutants whereas we 449

had not noted this phenotype in the wild type (Fig 9D and E) A quantitative 450

analysis of these phenotypes over all gata mutant phenotypes revealed that 451

the number of first and second order lateral branches increased with 452

increasing mutant complexity (Fig 9B) Here we observed strong effects 453

already in the gata17 gata17l mutant as well as the gnc gnl double mutant but 454

strongest defects in the triple and the quintuple mutant thus all five GATA 455

genes may contribute to this phenotype (Fig 9B) At the same time plant 456

height was reduced to a significant but still minor level in these mutants 457

suggesting that decreases in plant height which may have indirect 458

consequences on the general plant habitus and branching are not the 459

primary cause for altered branching patterns in the gata mutants (Fig 9C) It 460

is further important to note that the higher order GATA gene mutants initiated 461

fewer vegetative buds but had a higher number of growing buds as reflected 462

by the increased branch numbers (Fig 9F) Thus axillary bud formation is 463

promoted and bud outgrowth is repressed by the GATAs in the wild type 464

Another phenotype that became apparent during our analysis of the gata 465

mutant plant habitus was an increase in the angle formed between the 466

primary inflorescence and the lateral inflorescences (Fig 9G and H Fig S9) 467

gata mutants had a decreased angle formed between the primary 468

inflorescence and lateral inflorescences and this phenotype was strongest in 469

the quintuple mutant and intermediate in the gnc gnl and triple mutants (Fig 470

9G and H Fig S9) Interestingly we had previously observed increased 471

branch angles in GATA overexpression lines such as GNLox (Fig S9) 472

(Behringer et al 2014) We thus concluded that GATA gene mutants and 473

overexpressors antagonistically regulate branch angles in Arabidopsis 474

475

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

16

GATA genes regulate petal and sepal numbers as well as silique length 476

CK signaling has recently been implicated in the control of floral development 477

(Han et al 2014) When we analyzed gata mutant flowers in more detail we 478

noted with interest aberrations in floral organ numbers in comparison to the 479

wild type (Fig 10A) Whereas wild type flowers have generally four sepals 480

and four petals and only rarely deviate from this pattern (in our study in 481

around 2 of the cases) a strong increase in flowers with more than four 482

(generally five in rare cases six) petals and sepals became apparent in the 483

higher order gata mutants (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) In the gata17 gata17l 484

mutants we observed flowers with more than four sepals and petals in 12 of 485

all flowers and this number was slightly enhanced in the triple mutant (13 486

petals) and the quintuple mutant (14 petals) (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) 487

Importantly the single mutants with the clearest apparent effect were the 488

gata17 and gata17l mutants and inversely mutations in GNC and GNL 489

contributed only to a minor extent to this phenotype (Fig S10A) In summary 490

this analysis revealed that GATA17 and GATA17L make a particularly strong 491

contribution to the floral morphology phenotype of the gata mutants 492

Since we had previously noted that overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-493

GATAs have short siliques and a reduced number of seeds per silique we 494

also analyzed silique length and seed set in the gata mutants (Fig S10B - D) 495

In line with an antagonistic regulation of these traits in the gata mutants we 496

measured significant increases in seed set in the siliques of the gnc gnl the 497

triple as well as the quintuple mutants and we detected significant increases 498

in silique length in all mutant backgrounds (Fig S10B - D) We thus concluded 499

that the GATA genes repress silique elongation and seed set in the wild type 500

at least to a minor extent A differential contribution of individual GATAs to 501

these phenotypes could however not be resolved here 502

503

GATA gene mutants have antagonistic effects on flowering time in long 504

and short days Accelerated flowering in plants grown under long-day 505

conditions was another phenotype previously described for gnc gnl mutants 506

(Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) Conversely overexpression of the 507

LLM-domain B-GATAs causes a strong delay in flowering (Richter et al 508

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

17

2010 Richter et al 2013 Behringer et al 2014) To examine the contribution 509

of the other GATA factors to the flowering time phenotype we grew the gata 510

mutant series in long day and short day conditions with a 16 hr and 8 hr light 511

period respectively (Fig 10B and C Fig S11) Interestingly we observed a 512

gradual acceleration of flowering in long day-grown plants that was weakest in 513

the single mutants more pronounced in the double triple quadruple mutants 514

and strongest in the quintuple mutants (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) 515

We thus concluded that all LLM-domain B-GATA genes examined here may 516

contribute to the repression of flowering in long day-grown plants 517

Interestingly the effects of the reduced GATA gene function on flowering time 518

in short day conditions were antagonistic to those observed in long day-grown 519

plants in that the complex GATA gene mutants flowered much later than the 520

wild type or the less complex mutant combinations when flowering was 521

counted in days (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) We thus concluded that 522

the LLM-domain B-GATAs factors regulate flowering time in long and short 523

day conditions but in view of the antagonistic nature of this regulation that 524

their contribution to flowering time control may be complex 525

526

Cross-regulation of GATA gene expression Since several of our genetic 527

analyses had suggested a functional redundancy between the GATA genes 528

we looked for evidences of a cross-regulation of GATA gene expression in the 529

gnc gnl double mutant background There we detected indeed an increased 530

transcript abundance of GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 531

mutant which could be compensatory for the loss of GNC and GNL (Fig 11A) 532

At the same time GATA15 GATA16 and GATA17L gene expression levels 533

were significantly reduced in GNL overexpression lines (GNLox) suggesting 534

that GNL may regulate the expression of these genes 535

Since these observations indicated that molecular mechanisms may exist that 536

compensate for the loss of individual LLM-domain B-GATA genes eg in the 537

gnc gnl mutants we examined the binding of GNL to the LLM-domain GATA 538

gene promoters after ChIP-seq analysis (chromatin immunoprecipitation 539

followed by DNA sequencing) Here we found that at least three of the six 540

LLM-domain B-GATA genes were bound by GNL after immunoprecipitation of 541

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

18

HA-tagged GNL from transgenic plants expressing a functional GNLHA 542

transgene from a GNL promoter fragment in the gnc gnl background 543

(pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl Fig 11B) Through subsequent ChIP-PCR studies 544

targeting selected regions upstream from GNC GNL and GATA17 we could 545

confirm this binding through independent analyses (Fig 11C) Thus LLM-546

domain B-GATA factors may directly regulate their own expression as well as 547

that of other family members 548

549

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

19

DISCUSSION 550

In the present study we have characterized the six-membered family of LLM-551

domain B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Whereas the family has diverged when 552

compared between Arabidopsis tomato barley and Brachypodium a clear 553

conservation of this protein family can be observed within the Brassicaceae 554

family (Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014) Within the Brassicaceae GNC and 555

GNL GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and GATA17L form closely 556

related LLM-domain B-GATA pairs In a previous study we had comparatively 557

analyzed transgenic Arabidopsis lines expressing different members of the 558

LLM-domain B-GATA gene family from Arabidopsis barley and tomato and 559

concluded that these genes are functionally redundant at the biochemical 560

level since their overexpression resulted in highly similar phenotypes 561

(Behringer et al 2014) Several of the phenotypes analyzed here namely 562

greening (Fig 1D-F) hypocotyl elongation (Fig 4) plant height branching 563

patterns (Fig 9) branch angles (Fig 9 and Fig S9) silique length seed set 564

(Fig S10) flowering time (Fig 10) as well as senescence (Fig 8) are 565

strongest in the gata quintuple mutant and weaker or in some cases not even 566

apparent in the less complex gata mutant combinations Thus in line with this 567

previous study our present analysis shows that the LLM-domain B-GATA 568

genes from Arabidopsis have a shared biological function in the control of 569

multiple developmental pathways 570

Due to the high complexity of the available range of single double triple 571

quadruple and quintuple mutants we restricted many of our phenotypic 572

analyses to the gnc gnl double the complementary triple and the quintuple 573

mutants It can nevertheless be suggested based on the presently available 574

data that some phenotypes are predominantly controlled by a single LLM-575

domain B-GATA or rather an LLM-domain B-GATA gene pair Phyllotactic 576

patterning as assessed here in the inflorescence is impaired in the gata triple 577

but not in the gnc gnl double mutant (Fig 7) Similarly the increases in floral 578

organ numbers are already very prominent in the gata17 gata17l double 579

mutants and not much more enhanced in the gata triple or quintuple mutant 580

that includes the gata17 gata17l mutations (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) Thus 581

the LLM-domain B-GATA genes have shared overlapping but also distinct 582

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

20

roles in the control of plant development The fact that GATA15 gene function 583

is not impaired in the selected GATA15 gene insertion allele does not allow us 584

to draw any direct conclusions on the biological function of this gene based on 585

the data presented here Furthermore the fact that the mutant alleles of 586

GATA16 and GATA17 used in the complex mutants are only partially 587

defective in GATA gene expression could suggest that even stronger 588

phenotypes may be observed if loss-of-function alleles were used The two 589

strong alleles for GATA15 (gata15-2) and GATA17 (gata17-2) isolated here 590

but analyzed only as single mutants may help in the future to understand the 591

biological function of these GATA genes at further depth 592

It is interesting that the overexpression lines and the mutants of these GATA 593

genes frequently have antagonistic phenotypes This study in combination 594

with a previous study identifies such antagonistically regulated phenotypes in 595

the control of greening hypocotyl elongation branch angle formation 596

flowering time and senescence (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 597

Particularly in the case of transcription factors where the loss-of-function or 598

overexpression may affect the expression of many downstream targets genes 599

and developmental responses triggered by these target genes one may not 600

expect such a clear antagonistic relationship between mutants with reduced 601

gene functions and the overexpressors In view of the fact that 602

overexpressors likely also control the expression of genes that are normally 603

not targeted by this transcription factor when expressed from their native 604

promoter (off-targets) this observation is even more striking It may suggest 605

that the GATAs examined here control developmental responses in a dosage-606

dependent manner together with other critical factors In this context the 607

presence and abundance of the GATAs would just modulate the response but 608

would by itself not be sufficient to trigger it Further analyses will be required 609

to gain a more detailed understanding of the mode of action of the LLM-610

domain B-GATA factors in the control of gene expression 611

We had previously shown that the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 612

repress flowering since their loss-of-function mutants and overexpressors 613

displayed an early and late flowering phenotype respectively when plants 614

were grown in long-day conditions (Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) 615

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

21

We furthermore showed that the control of flowering is partially mediated by 616

the flowering time regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION 617

OF CONSTANS1) which acts downstream from GNC and GNL and whose 618

promoter can be directly bound by GNC and GNL (Richter et al 2013) In line 619

with these previous observations we show here that the complex GATA gene 620

mutants flower even earlier than the gnc gnl mutant further substantiating our 621

conclusion that LLM-domain B-GATAs are flowering time regulators in 622

Arabidopsis (Fig 10B and Fig S11) Surprisingly the complex gata mutants 623

flowered late when grown in short day conditions and their phenotype was 624

thereby antagonistic to the phenotype observed in long days (Fig 10C and 625

Fig S9) The reason for this antagonistic flowering time behavior remains to 626

be resolved but a complex scenario may be envisioned We also do not want 627

to rule out that physiological parameters become limiting in the induction of 628

flowering in the gata mutants Long term defects as a result of their reduced 629

greening may play a limiting role during the extended growth in short days 630

with short illumination periods that are not limiting when plants are grown in 631

long days 632

Several of our phenotypic analyses suggested that the LLM-domain B-GATAs 633

act in concert to control specific phenotypes The fact that at least some of the 634

phenotypes were most pronounced in the quintuple mutant and not apparent 635

or only weak in the less complex mutants suggests that the LLM-domain B-636

GATAs may cross-regulate their expression and that presence and absence 637

of one GATA could interfere with the abundance of other GATA family 638

members We have analyzed this hypothesis here by examining the 639

expression of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 640

GATA17L in the gnc gnl mutant and in the GNL overexpression line (Fig 11A) 641

In both cases we found the expression of three of the four analyzed genes to 642

be differentially regulated in the two genetic backgrounds suggesting that the 643

GATAs can cross-regulate their gene expression and supporting again the 644

hypothesis that the GATAs have a repressive activity on the transcription of 645

the other GATA genes Further support for such a hypothetical cross-646

regulation came from a ChIP-seq analysis with GNL where we observed a 647

strong binding of GNL when expressed from its own promoter to the three 648

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

11

GATA gene mutants have differential gene expression defects The 312

strong induction of GNL gene expression by CK was already repeatedly 313

described and is the reason for the genersquos original designation CGA1 314

(CYTOKININ-INDUCED GATA1) (Naito et al 2007 Kollmer et al 2011) In 315

order to examine the role of the GATA genes in CK-responsive gene 316

expression we performed microarray experiments with 14 day-old wild type 317

plants gnc gnl and triple mutants as well as quintuple mutants treated for 60 318

min with the CK 6-BA (6-benzylaminopurine) or a corresponding mock solvent 319

control (Fig 5 and Fig 6 Supplemental Tables S1 and S2) We then 320

analyzed the resulting data with regard to differences in basal gene 321

expression (Fig 5) and with regard to gene expression differences after the 322

CK treatment in comparison to the mock control (Fig 6) For technical 323

reasons the experiment was conducted in two rounds the first experiment 324

included the Col-0 (1) wild type control the gnc gnl double mutant and the 325

quintuple mutant the second experiment included an independent Col-0 (2) 326

wild type control and the triple mutant When we examined the expression of 327

the CK-induced ARRs (A-TYPE RESPONSE REGULATORS) of the CK 328

signaling pathway we could confirm that the respective CK induction 329

experiments were comparably efficient between the two experiments and in 330

all genotypes tested (Fig S6A) We also examined the microarray dataset 331

with regard to the expression of a previously defined so-called ldquogolden listrdquo of 332

CK-regulated genes (Bhargava et al 2013) Over 70 of the 331 entities 333

derived from this list were significantly CK-regulated in our experiments 334

(Supplemental Table S3) When applying a two-fold expression change as 335

additional filter criterion 71 of these 331 entities were identified as up- (Col-0 336

1 and Col-0 2) and 39 (Col-0 1) and 25 entities (Col-0 2) as down-regulated 337

after CK treatment (Fig S6B and Supplemental Table S3) We thus 338

concluded that the CK treatments in both experiments were similarly efficient 339

and that the data sets could be used for comparative analyses 340

The comparison of the basal gene expression profiles of the wild type 341

samples and the mutants indicated that the (untreated) quintuple mutant 342

seedlings had by far the largest number of differentially regulated genes with 343

4722 down-regulated and 976 up-regulated entities when compared to the 344

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

12

Col-0 (1) wild type (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) Furthermore the gnc 345

gnl double mutant contained 2458 down- and 294 up-regulated entities 346

respectively (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) In comparison the number 347

of differentially expressed genes was comparatively minor in the triple mutant 348

which had only 323 down- and 278 up-regulated entities in this particular 349

experiment and selected physiological growth conditions (Fig 5) 350

The comparatively strong gene expression differences in the gnc gnl double 351

and the quintuple mutants and the fact that both mutants shared the gnc gnl 352

loss-of-function at the genetic level was reflected by the large overlap 353

between the differentially expressed gene sets of the two genotypes 354

Specifically 1922 of the 2458 down-regulated entities from gnc gnl were also 355

down-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 5B) and 98 of the 294 entities 356

up-regulated in gnc gnl were also up-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 357

5B) Conversely the overlap in gene expression defects between the triple 358

mutant and the quintuple mutant was higher than that between the triple 359

mutant and gnc gnl (Fig 5B) We therefore concluded that the gene 360

expression differences between the different GATA gene mutants was 361

strongest in the quintuple mutant and that the strong increase in the number 362

of differentially regulated genes exceeded by far the differences seen in the 363

gnc gnl double mutant and the triple mutant This supported our conclusion 364

from the phenotypic analyses that the GATA genes act in a functionally 365

redundant manner 366

Since we had observed increased gene expression of all six GATA genes 367

after CK-treatment we expected that CK-induced gene expression may be 368

compromised in the gata mutants (Fig 6) Indeed of the 996 entities that 369

were down-regulated after CK-treatment in the wild type (Col-0 1) only 173 370

(18 ) and 89 (9 ) remained CK-regulated in the quintuple and gnc gnl 371

mutant respectively (Fig 6A and Supplemental Table S2) At the same time 372

of the 188 entities that were down-regulated after CK treatment in the wild 373

type sample of the second experiment (Col-0 2) 83 (44 ) remained CK-374

regulated in the gata triple mutant (Fig 6B) The differential effect on gene 375

expression between the different mutants was less pronounced when 376

examining the CK-induced genes Here 49 (quintuple mutant) 59 (gnc 377

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

13

gnl) and 63 (triple mutant) of the CK-induced entities from the respective 378

wild types remained CK-regulated in the mutants (Fig 6A and B) In summary 379

we concluded that CK-regulated gene expression is impaired in the GATA 380

gene mutants 381

382

GATA gene mutants are defective in CK-regulated developmental 383

processes Based on the strong defects of gata mutants in CK-regulated 384

gene expression we searched for phenotypes that could be explained by 385

defects in CK response CK signaling was described as a regulator of 386

phyllotactic patterning in the shoot apical meristem of Arabidopsis (Besnard et 387

al 2014) In line with a role of the LLM-domain B-GATA genes in this process 388

we observed frequent aberrations from normal phyllotactic patterning in flower 389

positioning in triple and quintuple mutant inflorescences (Fig 7) Quantitative 390

analyses revealed aberrations from the canonical angle of ~1375deg in about 391

~30 of the petioles in triple and quintuple inflorescences (Fig 7D) At the 392

same time this patterning defect was not apparent in the gnc gnl double 393

mutant Since we also did not observe a quantitative increase in the severity 394

of this phenotype between the triple and the quintuple mutant we concluded 395

that GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L may be responsible for this phenotype 396

(Fig 7D) 397

Leaf senescence is another CK-regulated process (Hwang et al 2012) In the 398

wild type CK levels are reduced during senescence and positive or negative 399

interference with the decrease in CK levels can promote and delay 400

senescence respectively (Hwang et al 2012) Senescence can be induced 401

by shifting light-grown plants to the dark and we had previously already shown 402

that leaf senescence is delayed in overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-403

GATAs (Behringer et al 2014) To examine possible senescence defects in 404

the gata mutants we floated leaves of wild type and mutant plants in the dark 405

on a mock solution or on a solution containing 005 microM or 01 microM 6-BA (Fig 406

8A ndash F) (Weaver and Amasino 2001) In line with the expectation that the 407

presence of CK in the medium would suppress the senescence process we 408

observed decreased senescence in CK-treated wild type leaves which we 409

quantitatively assessed by measuring chlorophyll levels in the mock- and CK-410

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

14

treated leaves (Fig 8F) Here we found that the effects of the senescence 411

treatment were less efficiently suppressed by CK treatments in the gnc gnl 412

double and in the quintuple mutant than in the wild type or the triple mutant 413

(Fig 8A - F) Similarly we observed a stronger effect on the decreases in 414

chlorophyll and total protein levels in the gnc gnl as well as the quintuple 415

mutant when we transferred light-grown plants for four days to the dark (Fig 416

8G ndash I) As previously reported GNL overexpressing plants (GNLox) had 417

senescence phenotypes that were antagonistic to the ones observed with the 418

mutants (Fig 8) (Behringer et al 2014) In the case of the leaf floating assay 419

CK-treatment had a stronger effect on greening and chlorophyll abundance in 420

GNLox than in the wild type (Fig 8A ndash F) When we transferred plants from 421

the light to the dark GNLox seedlings remained visibly green and did not 422

display the strong decrease in total protein abundance that we observed in 423

the wild type or the GATA gene mutants (Fig 8G ndash I) We thus concluded that 424

GATA gene mutants and overexpressors have antagonistic effects with 425

regard to the regulation of senescence and that GNC and GNL contribute 426

particularly strongly to this phenotype 427

CK induces greening in light-grown seedlings (Kobayashi et al 2012) To 428

examine to what extent CK can induce chlorophyll accumulation in the gata 429

mutants we grew plants for two weeks in constant light on medium containing 430

CK (5 nM BA) or a corresponding CK-free medium As expected chlorophyll 431

content was increased in wild type plants but this increase was neither 432

significant in the gnc gnl nor the triple or the quintuple mutants (Fig S7) We 433

thus concluded that the GATA factors are required for CK-induced greening in 434

Arabidopsis seedlings 435

It was previously reported that hypocotyl elongation could be repressed by 436

incubating dark-grown seedlings in the presence of CK (Su and Howell 1995) 437

Since the GATA gene mutants had displayed a hypocotyl elongation defect in 438

light-grown seedlings (Fig 4) we also explored the link between hypocotyl 439

elongation and CK However when we tested the effects of CK on hypocotyl 440

elongation in dark-grown seedlings we did not detect any significant 441

differences in the response between the different genotypes tested (Fig S8) 442

It is thus unlikely that the GATA genes participate in this elongation response 443

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

15

Branching is another phenotype that has been attributed to defects in CK 444

biosynthesis and response (El-Showk et al 2013) When we analyzed the 445

general habitus of the quintuple mutants we noted that they had an increased 446

number of secondary branches that was combined with a reduced plant 447

height (Fig 9A - C) Occasionally we also observed the outgrowth of 448

inflorescences in the axils of lateral inflorescences in the mutants whereas we 449

had not noted this phenotype in the wild type (Fig 9D and E) A quantitative 450

analysis of these phenotypes over all gata mutant phenotypes revealed that 451

the number of first and second order lateral branches increased with 452

increasing mutant complexity (Fig 9B) Here we observed strong effects 453

already in the gata17 gata17l mutant as well as the gnc gnl double mutant but 454

strongest defects in the triple and the quintuple mutant thus all five GATA 455

genes may contribute to this phenotype (Fig 9B) At the same time plant 456

height was reduced to a significant but still minor level in these mutants 457

suggesting that decreases in plant height which may have indirect 458

consequences on the general plant habitus and branching are not the 459

primary cause for altered branching patterns in the gata mutants (Fig 9C) It 460

is further important to note that the higher order GATA gene mutants initiated 461

fewer vegetative buds but had a higher number of growing buds as reflected 462

by the increased branch numbers (Fig 9F) Thus axillary bud formation is 463

promoted and bud outgrowth is repressed by the GATAs in the wild type 464

Another phenotype that became apparent during our analysis of the gata 465

mutant plant habitus was an increase in the angle formed between the 466

primary inflorescence and the lateral inflorescences (Fig 9G and H Fig S9) 467

gata mutants had a decreased angle formed between the primary 468

inflorescence and lateral inflorescences and this phenotype was strongest in 469

the quintuple mutant and intermediate in the gnc gnl and triple mutants (Fig 470

9G and H Fig S9) Interestingly we had previously observed increased 471

branch angles in GATA overexpression lines such as GNLox (Fig S9) 472

(Behringer et al 2014) We thus concluded that GATA gene mutants and 473

overexpressors antagonistically regulate branch angles in Arabidopsis 474

475

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

16

GATA genes regulate petal and sepal numbers as well as silique length 476

CK signaling has recently been implicated in the control of floral development 477

(Han et al 2014) When we analyzed gata mutant flowers in more detail we 478

noted with interest aberrations in floral organ numbers in comparison to the 479

wild type (Fig 10A) Whereas wild type flowers have generally four sepals 480

and four petals and only rarely deviate from this pattern (in our study in 481

around 2 of the cases) a strong increase in flowers with more than four 482

(generally five in rare cases six) petals and sepals became apparent in the 483

higher order gata mutants (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) In the gata17 gata17l 484

mutants we observed flowers with more than four sepals and petals in 12 of 485

all flowers and this number was slightly enhanced in the triple mutant (13 486

petals) and the quintuple mutant (14 petals) (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) 487

Importantly the single mutants with the clearest apparent effect were the 488

gata17 and gata17l mutants and inversely mutations in GNC and GNL 489

contributed only to a minor extent to this phenotype (Fig S10A) In summary 490

this analysis revealed that GATA17 and GATA17L make a particularly strong 491

contribution to the floral morphology phenotype of the gata mutants 492

Since we had previously noted that overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-493

GATAs have short siliques and a reduced number of seeds per silique we 494

also analyzed silique length and seed set in the gata mutants (Fig S10B - D) 495

In line with an antagonistic regulation of these traits in the gata mutants we 496

measured significant increases in seed set in the siliques of the gnc gnl the 497

triple as well as the quintuple mutants and we detected significant increases 498

in silique length in all mutant backgrounds (Fig S10B - D) We thus concluded 499

that the GATA genes repress silique elongation and seed set in the wild type 500

at least to a minor extent A differential contribution of individual GATAs to 501

these phenotypes could however not be resolved here 502

503

GATA gene mutants have antagonistic effects on flowering time in long 504

and short days Accelerated flowering in plants grown under long-day 505

conditions was another phenotype previously described for gnc gnl mutants 506

(Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) Conversely overexpression of the 507

LLM-domain B-GATAs causes a strong delay in flowering (Richter et al 508

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

17

2010 Richter et al 2013 Behringer et al 2014) To examine the contribution 509

of the other GATA factors to the flowering time phenotype we grew the gata 510

mutant series in long day and short day conditions with a 16 hr and 8 hr light 511

period respectively (Fig 10B and C Fig S11) Interestingly we observed a 512

gradual acceleration of flowering in long day-grown plants that was weakest in 513

the single mutants more pronounced in the double triple quadruple mutants 514

and strongest in the quintuple mutants (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) 515

We thus concluded that all LLM-domain B-GATA genes examined here may 516

contribute to the repression of flowering in long day-grown plants 517

Interestingly the effects of the reduced GATA gene function on flowering time 518

in short day conditions were antagonistic to those observed in long day-grown 519

plants in that the complex GATA gene mutants flowered much later than the 520

wild type or the less complex mutant combinations when flowering was 521

counted in days (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) We thus concluded that 522

the LLM-domain B-GATAs factors regulate flowering time in long and short 523

day conditions but in view of the antagonistic nature of this regulation that 524

their contribution to flowering time control may be complex 525

526

Cross-regulation of GATA gene expression Since several of our genetic 527

analyses had suggested a functional redundancy between the GATA genes 528

we looked for evidences of a cross-regulation of GATA gene expression in the 529

gnc gnl double mutant background There we detected indeed an increased 530

transcript abundance of GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 531

mutant which could be compensatory for the loss of GNC and GNL (Fig 11A) 532

At the same time GATA15 GATA16 and GATA17L gene expression levels 533

were significantly reduced in GNL overexpression lines (GNLox) suggesting 534

that GNL may regulate the expression of these genes 535

Since these observations indicated that molecular mechanisms may exist that 536

compensate for the loss of individual LLM-domain B-GATA genes eg in the 537

gnc gnl mutants we examined the binding of GNL to the LLM-domain GATA 538

gene promoters after ChIP-seq analysis (chromatin immunoprecipitation 539

followed by DNA sequencing) Here we found that at least three of the six 540

LLM-domain B-GATA genes were bound by GNL after immunoprecipitation of 541

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

18

HA-tagged GNL from transgenic plants expressing a functional GNLHA 542

transgene from a GNL promoter fragment in the gnc gnl background 543

(pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl Fig 11B) Through subsequent ChIP-PCR studies 544

targeting selected regions upstream from GNC GNL and GATA17 we could 545

confirm this binding through independent analyses (Fig 11C) Thus LLM-546

domain B-GATA factors may directly regulate their own expression as well as 547

that of other family members 548

549

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

19

DISCUSSION 550

In the present study we have characterized the six-membered family of LLM-551

domain B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Whereas the family has diverged when 552

compared between Arabidopsis tomato barley and Brachypodium a clear 553

conservation of this protein family can be observed within the Brassicaceae 554

family (Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014) Within the Brassicaceae GNC and 555

GNL GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and GATA17L form closely 556

related LLM-domain B-GATA pairs In a previous study we had comparatively 557

analyzed transgenic Arabidopsis lines expressing different members of the 558

LLM-domain B-GATA gene family from Arabidopsis barley and tomato and 559

concluded that these genes are functionally redundant at the biochemical 560

level since their overexpression resulted in highly similar phenotypes 561

(Behringer et al 2014) Several of the phenotypes analyzed here namely 562

greening (Fig 1D-F) hypocotyl elongation (Fig 4) plant height branching 563

patterns (Fig 9) branch angles (Fig 9 and Fig S9) silique length seed set 564

(Fig S10) flowering time (Fig 10) as well as senescence (Fig 8) are 565

strongest in the gata quintuple mutant and weaker or in some cases not even 566

apparent in the less complex gata mutant combinations Thus in line with this 567

previous study our present analysis shows that the LLM-domain B-GATA 568

genes from Arabidopsis have a shared biological function in the control of 569

multiple developmental pathways 570

Due to the high complexity of the available range of single double triple 571

quadruple and quintuple mutants we restricted many of our phenotypic 572

analyses to the gnc gnl double the complementary triple and the quintuple 573

mutants It can nevertheless be suggested based on the presently available 574

data that some phenotypes are predominantly controlled by a single LLM-575

domain B-GATA or rather an LLM-domain B-GATA gene pair Phyllotactic 576

patterning as assessed here in the inflorescence is impaired in the gata triple 577

but not in the gnc gnl double mutant (Fig 7) Similarly the increases in floral 578

organ numbers are already very prominent in the gata17 gata17l double 579

mutants and not much more enhanced in the gata triple or quintuple mutant 580

that includes the gata17 gata17l mutations (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) Thus 581

the LLM-domain B-GATA genes have shared overlapping but also distinct 582

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

20

roles in the control of plant development The fact that GATA15 gene function 583

is not impaired in the selected GATA15 gene insertion allele does not allow us 584

to draw any direct conclusions on the biological function of this gene based on 585

the data presented here Furthermore the fact that the mutant alleles of 586

GATA16 and GATA17 used in the complex mutants are only partially 587

defective in GATA gene expression could suggest that even stronger 588

phenotypes may be observed if loss-of-function alleles were used The two 589

strong alleles for GATA15 (gata15-2) and GATA17 (gata17-2) isolated here 590

but analyzed only as single mutants may help in the future to understand the 591

biological function of these GATA genes at further depth 592

It is interesting that the overexpression lines and the mutants of these GATA 593

genes frequently have antagonistic phenotypes This study in combination 594

with a previous study identifies such antagonistically regulated phenotypes in 595

the control of greening hypocotyl elongation branch angle formation 596

flowering time and senescence (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 597

Particularly in the case of transcription factors where the loss-of-function or 598

overexpression may affect the expression of many downstream targets genes 599

and developmental responses triggered by these target genes one may not 600

expect such a clear antagonistic relationship between mutants with reduced 601

gene functions and the overexpressors In view of the fact that 602

overexpressors likely also control the expression of genes that are normally 603

not targeted by this transcription factor when expressed from their native 604

promoter (off-targets) this observation is even more striking It may suggest 605

that the GATAs examined here control developmental responses in a dosage-606

dependent manner together with other critical factors In this context the 607

presence and abundance of the GATAs would just modulate the response but 608

would by itself not be sufficient to trigger it Further analyses will be required 609

to gain a more detailed understanding of the mode of action of the LLM-610

domain B-GATA factors in the control of gene expression 611

We had previously shown that the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 612

repress flowering since their loss-of-function mutants and overexpressors 613

displayed an early and late flowering phenotype respectively when plants 614

were grown in long-day conditions (Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) 615

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

21

We furthermore showed that the control of flowering is partially mediated by 616

the flowering time regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION 617

OF CONSTANS1) which acts downstream from GNC and GNL and whose 618

promoter can be directly bound by GNC and GNL (Richter et al 2013) In line 619

with these previous observations we show here that the complex GATA gene 620

mutants flower even earlier than the gnc gnl mutant further substantiating our 621

conclusion that LLM-domain B-GATAs are flowering time regulators in 622

Arabidopsis (Fig 10B and Fig S11) Surprisingly the complex gata mutants 623

flowered late when grown in short day conditions and their phenotype was 624

thereby antagonistic to the phenotype observed in long days (Fig 10C and 625

Fig S9) The reason for this antagonistic flowering time behavior remains to 626

be resolved but a complex scenario may be envisioned We also do not want 627

to rule out that physiological parameters become limiting in the induction of 628

flowering in the gata mutants Long term defects as a result of their reduced 629

greening may play a limiting role during the extended growth in short days 630

with short illumination periods that are not limiting when plants are grown in 631

long days 632

Several of our phenotypic analyses suggested that the LLM-domain B-GATAs 633

act in concert to control specific phenotypes The fact that at least some of the 634

phenotypes were most pronounced in the quintuple mutant and not apparent 635

or only weak in the less complex mutants suggests that the LLM-domain B-636

GATAs may cross-regulate their expression and that presence and absence 637

of one GATA could interfere with the abundance of other GATA family 638

members We have analyzed this hypothesis here by examining the 639

expression of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 640

GATA17L in the gnc gnl mutant and in the GNL overexpression line (Fig 11A) 641

In both cases we found the expression of three of the four analyzed genes to 642

be differentially regulated in the two genetic backgrounds suggesting that the 643

GATAs can cross-regulate their gene expression and supporting again the 644

hypothesis that the GATAs have a repressive activity on the transcription of 645

the other GATA genes Further support for such a hypothetical cross-646

regulation came from a ChIP-seq analysis with GNL where we observed a 647

strong binding of GNL when expressed from its own promoter to the three 648

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

12

Col-0 (1) wild type (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) Furthermore the gnc 345

gnl double mutant contained 2458 down- and 294 up-regulated entities 346

respectively (Fig 5 and Supplemental Table S1) In comparison the number 347

of differentially expressed genes was comparatively minor in the triple mutant 348

which had only 323 down- and 278 up-regulated entities in this particular 349

experiment and selected physiological growth conditions (Fig 5) 350

The comparatively strong gene expression differences in the gnc gnl double 351

and the quintuple mutants and the fact that both mutants shared the gnc gnl 352

loss-of-function at the genetic level was reflected by the large overlap 353

between the differentially expressed gene sets of the two genotypes 354

Specifically 1922 of the 2458 down-regulated entities from gnc gnl were also 355

down-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 5B) and 98 of the 294 entities 356

up-regulated in gnc gnl were also up-regulated in the quintuple mutant (Fig 357

5B) Conversely the overlap in gene expression defects between the triple 358

mutant and the quintuple mutant was higher than that between the triple 359

mutant and gnc gnl (Fig 5B) We therefore concluded that the gene 360

expression differences between the different GATA gene mutants was 361

strongest in the quintuple mutant and that the strong increase in the number 362

of differentially regulated genes exceeded by far the differences seen in the 363

gnc gnl double mutant and the triple mutant This supported our conclusion 364

from the phenotypic analyses that the GATA genes act in a functionally 365

redundant manner 366

Since we had observed increased gene expression of all six GATA genes 367

after CK-treatment we expected that CK-induced gene expression may be 368

compromised in the gata mutants (Fig 6) Indeed of the 996 entities that 369

were down-regulated after CK-treatment in the wild type (Col-0 1) only 173 370

(18 ) and 89 (9 ) remained CK-regulated in the quintuple and gnc gnl 371

mutant respectively (Fig 6A and Supplemental Table S2) At the same time 372

of the 188 entities that were down-regulated after CK treatment in the wild 373

type sample of the second experiment (Col-0 2) 83 (44 ) remained CK-374

regulated in the gata triple mutant (Fig 6B) The differential effect on gene 375

expression between the different mutants was less pronounced when 376

examining the CK-induced genes Here 49 (quintuple mutant) 59 (gnc 377

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

13

gnl) and 63 (triple mutant) of the CK-induced entities from the respective 378

wild types remained CK-regulated in the mutants (Fig 6A and B) In summary 379

we concluded that CK-regulated gene expression is impaired in the GATA 380

gene mutants 381

382

GATA gene mutants are defective in CK-regulated developmental 383

processes Based on the strong defects of gata mutants in CK-regulated 384

gene expression we searched for phenotypes that could be explained by 385

defects in CK response CK signaling was described as a regulator of 386

phyllotactic patterning in the shoot apical meristem of Arabidopsis (Besnard et 387

al 2014) In line with a role of the LLM-domain B-GATA genes in this process 388

we observed frequent aberrations from normal phyllotactic patterning in flower 389

positioning in triple and quintuple mutant inflorescences (Fig 7) Quantitative 390

analyses revealed aberrations from the canonical angle of ~1375deg in about 391

~30 of the petioles in triple and quintuple inflorescences (Fig 7D) At the 392

same time this patterning defect was not apparent in the gnc gnl double 393

mutant Since we also did not observe a quantitative increase in the severity 394

of this phenotype between the triple and the quintuple mutant we concluded 395

that GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L may be responsible for this phenotype 396

(Fig 7D) 397

Leaf senescence is another CK-regulated process (Hwang et al 2012) In the 398

wild type CK levels are reduced during senescence and positive or negative 399

interference with the decrease in CK levels can promote and delay 400

senescence respectively (Hwang et al 2012) Senescence can be induced 401

by shifting light-grown plants to the dark and we had previously already shown 402

that leaf senescence is delayed in overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-403

GATAs (Behringer et al 2014) To examine possible senescence defects in 404

the gata mutants we floated leaves of wild type and mutant plants in the dark 405

on a mock solution or on a solution containing 005 microM or 01 microM 6-BA (Fig 406

8A ndash F) (Weaver and Amasino 2001) In line with the expectation that the 407

presence of CK in the medium would suppress the senescence process we 408

observed decreased senescence in CK-treated wild type leaves which we 409

quantitatively assessed by measuring chlorophyll levels in the mock- and CK-410

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

14

treated leaves (Fig 8F) Here we found that the effects of the senescence 411

treatment were less efficiently suppressed by CK treatments in the gnc gnl 412

double and in the quintuple mutant than in the wild type or the triple mutant 413

(Fig 8A - F) Similarly we observed a stronger effect on the decreases in 414

chlorophyll and total protein levels in the gnc gnl as well as the quintuple 415

mutant when we transferred light-grown plants for four days to the dark (Fig 416

8G ndash I) As previously reported GNL overexpressing plants (GNLox) had 417

senescence phenotypes that were antagonistic to the ones observed with the 418

mutants (Fig 8) (Behringer et al 2014) In the case of the leaf floating assay 419

CK-treatment had a stronger effect on greening and chlorophyll abundance in 420

GNLox than in the wild type (Fig 8A ndash F) When we transferred plants from 421

the light to the dark GNLox seedlings remained visibly green and did not 422

display the strong decrease in total protein abundance that we observed in 423

the wild type or the GATA gene mutants (Fig 8G ndash I) We thus concluded that 424

GATA gene mutants and overexpressors have antagonistic effects with 425

regard to the regulation of senescence and that GNC and GNL contribute 426

particularly strongly to this phenotype 427

CK induces greening in light-grown seedlings (Kobayashi et al 2012) To 428

examine to what extent CK can induce chlorophyll accumulation in the gata 429

mutants we grew plants for two weeks in constant light on medium containing 430

CK (5 nM BA) or a corresponding CK-free medium As expected chlorophyll 431

content was increased in wild type plants but this increase was neither 432

significant in the gnc gnl nor the triple or the quintuple mutants (Fig S7) We 433

thus concluded that the GATA factors are required for CK-induced greening in 434

Arabidopsis seedlings 435

It was previously reported that hypocotyl elongation could be repressed by 436

incubating dark-grown seedlings in the presence of CK (Su and Howell 1995) 437

Since the GATA gene mutants had displayed a hypocotyl elongation defect in 438

light-grown seedlings (Fig 4) we also explored the link between hypocotyl 439

elongation and CK However when we tested the effects of CK on hypocotyl 440

elongation in dark-grown seedlings we did not detect any significant 441

differences in the response between the different genotypes tested (Fig S8) 442

It is thus unlikely that the GATA genes participate in this elongation response 443

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

15

Branching is another phenotype that has been attributed to defects in CK 444

biosynthesis and response (El-Showk et al 2013) When we analyzed the 445

general habitus of the quintuple mutants we noted that they had an increased 446

number of secondary branches that was combined with a reduced plant 447

height (Fig 9A - C) Occasionally we also observed the outgrowth of 448

inflorescences in the axils of lateral inflorescences in the mutants whereas we 449

had not noted this phenotype in the wild type (Fig 9D and E) A quantitative 450

analysis of these phenotypes over all gata mutant phenotypes revealed that 451

the number of first and second order lateral branches increased with 452

increasing mutant complexity (Fig 9B) Here we observed strong effects 453

already in the gata17 gata17l mutant as well as the gnc gnl double mutant but 454

strongest defects in the triple and the quintuple mutant thus all five GATA 455

genes may contribute to this phenotype (Fig 9B) At the same time plant 456

height was reduced to a significant but still minor level in these mutants 457

suggesting that decreases in plant height which may have indirect 458

consequences on the general plant habitus and branching are not the 459

primary cause for altered branching patterns in the gata mutants (Fig 9C) It 460

is further important to note that the higher order GATA gene mutants initiated 461

fewer vegetative buds but had a higher number of growing buds as reflected 462

by the increased branch numbers (Fig 9F) Thus axillary bud formation is 463

promoted and bud outgrowth is repressed by the GATAs in the wild type 464

Another phenotype that became apparent during our analysis of the gata 465

mutant plant habitus was an increase in the angle formed between the 466

primary inflorescence and the lateral inflorescences (Fig 9G and H Fig S9) 467

gata mutants had a decreased angle formed between the primary 468

inflorescence and lateral inflorescences and this phenotype was strongest in 469

the quintuple mutant and intermediate in the gnc gnl and triple mutants (Fig 470

9G and H Fig S9) Interestingly we had previously observed increased 471

branch angles in GATA overexpression lines such as GNLox (Fig S9) 472

(Behringer et al 2014) We thus concluded that GATA gene mutants and 473

overexpressors antagonistically regulate branch angles in Arabidopsis 474

475

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

16

GATA genes regulate petal and sepal numbers as well as silique length 476

CK signaling has recently been implicated in the control of floral development 477

(Han et al 2014) When we analyzed gata mutant flowers in more detail we 478

noted with interest aberrations in floral organ numbers in comparison to the 479

wild type (Fig 10A) Whereas wild type flowers have generally four sepals 480

and four petals and only rarely deviate from this pattern (in our study in 481

around 2 of the cases) a strong increase in flowers with more than four 482

(generally five in rare cases six) petals and sepals became apparent in the 483

higher order gata mutants (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) In the gata17 gata17l 484

mutants we observed flowers with more than four sepals and petals in 12 of 485

all flowers and this number was slightly enhanced in the triple mutant (13 486

petals) and the quintuple mutant (14 petals) (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) 487

Importantly the single mutants with the clearest apparent effect were the 488

gata17 and gata17l mutants and inversely mutations in GNC and GNL 489

contributed only to a minor extent to this phenotype (Fig S10A) In summary 490

this analysis revealed that GATA17 and GATA17L make a particularly strong 491

contribution to the floral morphology phenotype of the gata mutants 492

Since we had previously noted that overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-493

GATAs have short siliques and a reduced number of seeds per silique we 494

also analyzed silique length and seed set in the gata mutants (Fig S10B - D) 495

In line with an antagonistic regulation of these traits in the gata mutants we 496

measured significant increases in seed set in the siliques of the gnc gnl the 497

triple as well as the quintuple mutants and we detected significant increases 498

in silique length in all mutant backgrounds (Fig S10B - D) We thus concluded 499

that the GATA genes repress silique elongation and seed set in the wild type 500

at least to a minor extent A differential contribution of individual GATAs to 501

these phenotypes could however not be resolved here 502

503

GATA gene mutants have antagonistic effects on flowering time in long 504

and short days Accelerated flowering in plants grown under long-day 505

conditions was another phenotype previously described for gnc gnl mutants 506

(Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) Conversely overexpression of the 507

LLM-domain B-GATAs causes a strong delay in flowering (Richter et al 508

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

17

2010 Richter et al 2013 Behringer et al 2014) To examine the contribution 509

of the other GATA factors to the flowering time phenotype we grew the gata 510

mutant series in long day and short day conditions with a 16 hr and 8 hr light 511

period respectively (Fig 10B and C Fig S11) Interestingly we observed a 512

gradual acceleration of flowering in long day-grown plants that was weakest in 513

the single mutants more pronounced in the double triple quadruple mutants 514

and strongest in the quintuple mutants (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) 515

We thus concluded that all LLM-domain B-GATA genes examined here may 516

contribute to the repression of flowering in long day-grown plants 517

Interestingly the effects of the reduced GATA gene function on flowering time 518

in short day conditions were antagonistic to those observed in long day-grown 519

plants in that the complex GATA gene mutants flowered much later than the 520

wild type or the less complex mutant combinations when flowering was 521

counted in days (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) We thus concluded that 522

the LLM-domain B-GATAs factors regulate flowering time in long and short 523

day conditions but in view of the antagonistic nature of this regulation that 524

their contribution to flowering time control may be complex 525

526

Cross-regulation of GATA gene expression Since several of our genetic 527

analyses had suggested a functional redundancy between the GATA genes 528

we looked for evidences of a cross-regulation of GATA gene expression in the 529

gnc gnl double mutant background There we detected indeed an increased 530

transcript abundance of GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 531

mutant which could be compensatory for the loss of GNC and GNL (Fig 11A) 532

At the same time GATA15 GATA16 and GATA17L gene expression levels 533

were significantly reduced in GNL overexpression lines (GNLox) suggesting 534

that GNL may regulate the expression of these genes 535

Since these observations indicated that molecular mechanisms may exist that 536

compensate for the loss of individual LLM-domain B-GATA genes eg in the 537

gnc gnl mutants we examined the binding of GNL to the LLM-domain GATA 538

gene promoters after ChIP-seq analysis (chromatin immunoprecipitation 539

followed by DNA sequencing) Here we found that at least three of the six 540

LLM-domain B-GATA genes were bound by GNL after immunoprecipitation of 541

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

18

HA-tagged GNL from transgenic plants expressing a functional GNLHA 542

transgene from a GNL promoter fragment in the gnc gnl background 543

(pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl Fig 11B) Through subsequent ChIP-PCR studies 544

targeting selected regions upstream from GNC GNL and GATA17 we could 545

confirm this binding through independent analyses (Fig 11C) Thus LLM-546

domain B-GATA factors may directly regulate their own expression as well as 547

that of other family members 548

549

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

19

DISCUSSION 550

In the present study we have characterized the six-membered family of LLM-551

domain B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Whereas the family has diverged when 552

compared between Arabidopsis tomato barley and Brachypodium a clear 553

conservation of this protein family can be observed within the Brassicaceae 554

family (Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014) Within the Brassicaceae GNC and 555

GNL GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and GATA17L form closely 556

related LLM-domain B-GATA pairs In a previous study we had comparatively 557

analyzed transgenic Arabidopsis lines expressing different members of the 558

LLM-domain B-GATA gene family from Arabidopsis barley and tomato and 559

concluded that these genes are functionally redundant at the biochemical 560

level since their overexpression resulted in highly similar phenotypes 561

(Behringer et al 2014) Several of the phenotypes analyzed here namely 562

greening (Fig 1D-F) hypocotyl elongation (Fig 4) plant height branching 563

patterns (Fig 9) branch angles (Fig 9 and Fig S9) silique length seed set 564

(Fig S10) flowering time (Fig 10) as well as senescence (Fig 8) are 565

strongest in the gata quintuple mutant and weaker or in some cases not even 566

apparent in the less complex gata mutant combinations Thus in line with this 567

previous study our present analysis shows that the LLM-domain B-GATA 568

genes from Arabidopsis have a shared biological function in the control of 569

multiple developmental pathways 570

Due to the high complexity of the available range of single double triple 571

quadruple and quintuple mutants we restricted many of our phenotypic 572

analyses to the gnc gnl double the complementary triple and the quintuple 573

mutants It can nevertheless be suggested based on the presently available 574

data that some phenotypes are predominantly controlled by a single LLM-575

domain B-GATA or rather an LLM-domain B-GATA gene pair Phyllotactic 576

patterning as assessed here in the inflorescence is impaired in the gata triple 577

but not in the gnc gnl double mutant (Fig 7) Similarly the increases in floral 578

organ numbers are already very prominent in the gata17 gata17l double 579

mutants and not much more enhanced in the gata triple or quintuple mutant 580

that includes the gata17 gata17l mutations (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) Thus 581

the LLM-domain B-GATA genes have shared overlapping but also distinct 582

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

20

roles in the control of plant development The fact that GATA15 gene function 583

is not impaired in the selected GATA15 gene insertion allele does not allow us 584

to draw any direct conclusions on the biological function of this gene based on 585

the data presented here Furthermore the fact that the mutant alleles of 586

GATA16 and GATA17 used in the complex mutants are only partially 587

defective in GATA gene expression could suggest that even stronger 588

phenotypes may be observed if loss-of-function alleles were used The two 589

strong alleles for GATA15 (gata15-2) and GATA17 (gata17-2) isolated here 590

but analyzed only as single mutants may help in the future to understand the 591

biological function of these GATA genes at further depth 592

It is interesting that the overexpression lines and the mutants of these GATA 593

genes frequently have antagonistic phenotypes This study in combination 594

with a previous study identifies such antagonistically regulated phenotypes in 595

the control of greening hypocotyl elongation branch angle formation 596

flowering time and senescence (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 597

Particularly in the case of transcription factors where the loss-of-function or 598

overexpression may affect the expression of many downstream targets genes 599

and developmental responses triggered by these target genes one may not 600

expect such a clear antagonistic relationship between mutants with reduced 601

gene functions and the overexpressors In view of the fact that 602

overexpressors likely also control the expression of genes that are normally 603

not targeted by this transcription factor when expressed from their native 604

promoter (off-targets) this observation is even more striking It may suggest 605

that the GATAs examined here control developmental responses in a dosage-606

dependent manner together with other critical factors In this context the 607

presence and abundance of the GATAs would just modulate the response but 608

would by itself not be sufficient to trigger it Further analyses will be required 609

to gain a more detailed understanding of the mode of action of the LLM-610

domain B-GATA factors in the control of gene expression 611

We had previously shown that the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 612

repress flowering since their loss-of-function mutants and overexpressors 613

displayed an early and late flowering phenotype respectively when plants 614

were grown in long-day conditions (Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) 615

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

21

We furthermore showed that the control of flowering is partially mediated by 616

the flowering time regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION 617

OF CONSTANS1) which acts downstream from GNC and GNL and whose 618

promoter can be directly bound by GNC and GNL (Richter et al 2013) In line 619

with these previous observations we show here that the complex GATA gene 620

mutants flower even earlier than the gnc gnl mutant further substantiating our 621

conclusion that LLM-domain B-GATAs are flowering time regulators in 622

Arabidopsis (Fig 10B and Fig S11) Surprisingly the complex gata mutants 623

flowered late when grown in short day conditions and their phenotype was 624

thereby antagonistic to the phenotype observed in long days (Fig 10C and 625

Fig S9) The reason for this antagonistic flowering time behavior remains to 626

be resolved but a complex scenario may be envisioned We also do not want 627

to rule out that physiological parameters become limiting in the induction of 628

flowering in the gata mutants Long term defects as a result of their reduced 629

greening may play a limiting role during the extended growth in short days 630

with short illumination periods that are not limiting when plants are grown in 631

long days 632

Several of our phenotypic analyses suggested that the LLM-domain B-GATAs 633

act in concert to control specific phenotypes The fact that at least some of the 634

phenotypes were most pronounced in the quintuple mutant and not apparent 635

or only weak in the less complex mutants suggests that the LLM-domain B-636

GATAs may cross-regulate their expression and that presence and absence 637

of one GATA could interfere with the abundance of other GATA family 638

members We have analyzed this hypothesis here by examining the 639

expression of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 640

GATA17L in the gnc gnl mutant and in the GNL overexpression line (Fig 11A) 641

In both cases we found the expression of three of the four analyzed genes to 642

be differentially regulated in the two genetic backgrounds suggesting that the 643

GATAs can cross-regulate their gene expression and supporting again the 644

hypothesis that the GATAs have a repressive activity on the transcription of 645

the other GATA genes Further support for such a hypothetical cross-646

regulation came from a ChIP-seq analysis with GNL where we observed a 647

strong binding of GNL when expressed from its own promoter to the three 648

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

13

gnl) and 63 (triple mutant) of the CK-induced entities from the respective 378

wild types remained CK-regulated in the mutants (Fig 6A and B) In summary 379

we concluded that CK-regulated gene expression is impaired in the GATA 380

gene mutants 381

382

GATA gene mutants are defective in CK-regulated developmental 383

processes Based on the strong defects of gata mutants in CK-regulated 384

gene expression we searched for phenotypes that could be explained by 385

defects in CK response CK signaling was described as a regulator of 386

phyllotactic patterning in the shoot apical meristem of Arabidopsis (Besnard et 387

al 2014) In line with a role of the LLM-domain B-GATA genes in this process 388

we observed frequent aberrations from normal phyllotactic patterning in flower 389

positioning in triple and quintuple mutant inflorescences (Fig 7) Quantitative 390

analyses revealed aberrations from the canonical angle of ~1375deg in about 391

~30 of the petioles in triple and quintuple inflorescences (Fig 7D) At the 392

same time this patterning defect was not apparent in the gnc gnl double 393

mutant Since we also did not observe a quantitative increase in the severity 394

of this phenotype between the triple and the quintuple mutant we concluded 395

that GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L may be responsible for this phenotype 396

(Fig 7D) 397

Leaf senescence is another CK-regulated process (Hwang et al 2012) In the 398

wild type CK levels are reduced during senescence and positive or negative 399

interference with the decrease in CK levels can promote and delay 400

senescence respectively (Hwang et al 2012) Senescence can be induced 401

by shifting light-grown plants to the dark and we had previously already shown 402

that leaf senescence is delayed in overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-403

GATAs (Behringer et al 2014) To examine possible senescence defects in 404

the gata mutants we floated leaves of wild type and mutant plants in the dark 405

on a mock solution or on a solution containing 005 microM or 01 microM 6-BA (Fig 406

8A ndash F) (Weaver and Amasino 2001) In line with the expectation that the 407

presence of CK in the medium would suppress the senescence process we 408

observed decreased senescence in CK-treated wild type leaves which we 409

quantitatively assessed by measuring chlorophyll levels in the mock- and CK-410

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

14

treated leaves (Fig 8F) Here we found that the effects of the senescence 411

treatment were less efficiently suppressed by CK treatments in the gnc gnl 412

double and in the quintuple mutant than in the wild type or the triple mutant 413

(Fig 8A - F) Similarly we observed a stronger effect on the decreases in 414

chlorophyll and total protein levels in the gnc gnl as well as the quintuple 415

mutant when we transferred light-grown plants for four days to the dark (Fig 416

8G ndash I) As previously reported GNL overexpressing plants (GNLox) had 417

senescence phenotypes that were antagonistic to the ones observed with the 418

mutants (Fig 8) (Behringer et al 2014) In the case of the leaf floating assay 419

CK-treatment had a stronger effect on greening and chlorophyll abundance in 420

GNLox than in the wild type (Fig 8A ndash F) When we transferred plants from 421

the light to the dark GNLox seedlings remained visibly green and did not 422

display the strong decrease in total protein abundance that we observed in 423

the wild type or the GATA gene mutants (Fig 8G ndash I) We thus concluded that 424

GATA gene mutants and overexpressors have antagonistic effects with 425

regard to the regulation of senescence and that GNC and GNL contribute 426

particularly strongly to this phenotype 427

CK induces greening in light-grown seedlings (Kobayashi et al 2012) To 428

examine to what extent CK can induce chlorophyll accumulation in the gata 429

mutants we grew plants for two weeks in constant light on medium containing 430

CK (5 nM BA) or a corresponding CK-free medium As expected chlorophyll 431

content was increased in wild type plants but this increase was neither 432

significant in the gnc gnl nor the triple or the quintuple mutants (Fig S7) We 433

thus concluded that the GATA factors are required for CK-induced greening in 434

Arabidopsis seedlings 435

It was previously reported that hypocotyl elongation could be repressed by 436

incubating dark-grown seedlings in the presence of CK (Su and Howell 1995) 437

Since the GATA gene mutants had displayed a hypocotyl elongation defect in 438

light-grown seedlings (Fig 4) we also explored the link between hypocotyl 439

elongation and CK However when we tested the effects of CK on hypocotyl 440

elongation in dark-grown seedlings we did not detect any significant 441

differences in the response between the different genotypes tested (Fig S8) 442

It is thus unlikely that the GATA genes participate in this elongation response 443

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

15

Branching is another phenotype that has been attributed to defects in CK 444

biosynthesis and response (El-Showk et al 2013) When we analyzed the 445

general habitus of the quintuple mutants we noted that they had an increased 446

number of secondary branches that was combined with a reduced plant 447

height (Fig 9A - C) Occasionally we also observed the outgrowth of 448

inflorescences in the axils of lateral inflorescences in the mutants whereas we 449

had not noted this phenotype in the wild type (Fig 9D and E) A quantitative 450

analysis of these phenotypes over all gata mutant phenotypes revealed that 451

the number of first and second order lateral branches increased with 452

increasing mutant complexity (Fig 9B) Here we observed strong effects 453

already in the gata17 gata17l mutant as well as the gnc gnl double mutant but 454

strongest defects in the triple and the quintuple mutant thus all five GATA 455

genes may contribute to this phenotype (Fig 9B) At the same time plant 456

height was reduced to a significant but still minor level in these mutants 457

suggesting that decreases in plant height which may have indirect 458

consequences on the general plant habitus and branching are not the 459

primary cause for altered branching patterns in the gata mutants (Fig 9C) It 460

is further important to note that the higher order GATA gene mutants initiated 461

fewer vegetative buds but had a higher number of growing buds as reflected 462

by the increased branch numbers (Fig 9F) Thus axillary bud formation is 463

promoted and bud outgrowth is repressed by the GATAs in the wild type 464

Another phenotype that became apparent during our analysis of the gata 465

mutant plant habitus was an increase in the angle formed between the 466

primary inflorescence and the lateral inflorescences (Fig 9G and H Fig S9) 467

gata mutants had a decreased angle formed between the primary 468

inflorescence and lateral inflorescences and this phenotype was strongest in 469

the quintuple mutant and intermediate in the gnc gnl and triple mutants (Fig 470

9G and H Fig S9) Interestingly we had previously observed increased 471

branch angles in GATA overexpression lines such as GNLox (Fig S9) 472

(Behringer et al 2014) We thus concluded that GATA gene mutants and 473

overexpressors antagonistically regulate branch angles in Arabidopsis 474

475

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

16

GATA genes regulate petal and sepal numbers as well as silique length 476

CK signaling has recently been implicated in the control of floral development 477

(Han et al 2014) When we analyzed gata mutant flowers in more detail we 478

noted with interest aberrations in floral organ numbers in comparison to the 479

wild type (Fig 10A) Whereas wild type flowers have generally four sepals 480

and four petals and only rarely deviate from this pattern (in our study in 481

around 2 of the cases) a strong increase in flowers with more than four 482

(generally five in rare cases six) petals and sepals became apparent in the 483

higher order gata mutants (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) In the gata17 gata17l 484

mutants we observed flowers with more than four sepals and petals in 12 of 485

all flowers and this number was slightly enhanced in the triple mutant (13 486

petals) and the quintuple mutant (14 petals) (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) 487

Importantly the single mutants with the clearest apparent effect were the 488

gata17 and gata17l mutants and inversely mutations in GNC and GNL 489

contributed only to a minor extent to this phenotype (Fig S10A) In summary 490

this analysis revealed that GATA17 and GATA17L make a particularly strong 491

contribution to the floral morphology phenotype of the gata mutants 492

Since we had previously noted that overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-493

GATAs have short siliques and a reduced number of seeds per silique we 494

also analyzed silique length and seed set in the gata mutants (Fig S10B - D) 495

In line with an antagonistic regulation of these traits in the gata mutants we 496

measured significant increases in seed set in the siliques of the gnc gnl the 497

triple as well as the quintuple mutants and we detected significant increases 498

in silique length in all mutant backgrounds (Fig S10B - D) We thus concluded 499

that the GATA genes repress silique elongation and seed set in the wild type 500

at least to a minor extent A differential contribution of individual GATAs to 501

these phenotypes could however not be resolved here 502

503

GATA gene mutants have antagonistic effects on flowering time in long 504

and short days Accelerated flowering in plants grown under long-day 505

conditions was another phenotype previously described for gnc gnl mutants 506

(Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) Conversely overexpression of the 507

LLM-domain B-GATAs causes a strong delay in flowering (Richter et al 508

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

17

2010 Richter et al 2013 Behringer et al 2014) To examine the contribution 509

of the other GATA factors to the flowering time phenotype we grew the gata 510

mutant series in long day and short day conditions with a 16 hr and 8 hr light 511

period respectively (Fig 10B and C Fig S11) Interestingly we observed a 512

gradual acceleration of flowering in long day-grown plants that was weakest in 513

the single mutants more pronounced in the double triple quadruple mutants 514

and strongest in the quintuple mutants (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) 515

We thus concluded that all LLM-domain B-GATA genes examined here may 516

contribute to the repression of flowering in long day-grown plants 517

Interestingly the effects of the reduced GATA gene function on flowering time 518

in short day conditions were antagonistic to those observed in long day-grown 519

plants in that the complex GATA gene mutants flowered much later than the 520

wild type or the less complex mutant combinations when flowering was 521

counted in days (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) We thus concluded that 522

the LLM-domain B-GATAs factors regulate flowering time in long and short 523

day conditions but in view of the antagonistic nature of this regulation that 524

their contribution to flowering time control may be complex 525

526

Cross-regulation of GATA gene expression Since several of our genetic 527

analyses had suggested a functional redundancy between the GATA genes 528

we looked for evidences of a cross-regulation of GATA gene expression in the 529

gnc gnl double mutant background There we detected indeed an increased 530

transcript abundance of GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 531

mutant which could be compensatory for the loss of GNC and GNL (Fig 11A) 532

At the same time GATA15 GATA16 and GATA17L gene expression levels 533

were significantly reduced in GNL overexpression lines (GNLox) suggesting 534

that GNL may regulate the expression of these genes 535

Since these observations indicated that molecular mechanisms may exist that 536

compensate for the loss of individual LLM-domain B-GATA genes eg in the 537

gnc gnl mutants we examined the binding of GNL to the LLM-domain GATA 538

gene promoters after ChIP-seq analysis (chromatin immunoprecipitation 539

followed by DNA sequencing) Here we found that at least three of the six 540

LLM-domain B-GATA genes were bound by GNL after immunoprecipitation of 541

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

18

HA-tagged GNL from transgenic plants expressing a functional GNLHA 542

transgene from a GNL promoter fragment in the gnc gnl background 543

(pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl Fig 11B) Through subsequent ChIP-PCR studies 544

targeting selected regions upstream from GNC GNL and GATA17 we could 545

confirm this binding through independent analyses (Fig 11C) Thus LLM-546

domain B-GATA factors may directly regulate their own expression as well as 547

that of other family members 548

549

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

19

DISCUSSION 550

In the present study we have characterized the six-membered family of LLM-551

domain B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Whereas the family has diverged when 552

compared between Arabidopsis tomato barley and Brachypodium a clear 553

conservation of this protein family can be observed within the Brassicaceae 554

family (Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014) Within the Brassicaceae GNC and 555

GNL GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and GATA17L form closely 556

related LLM-domain B-GATA pairs In a previous study we had comparatively 557

analyzed transgenic Arabidopsis lines expressing different members of the 558

LLM-domain B-GATA gene family from Arabidopsis barley and tomato and 559

concluded that these genes are functionally redundant at the biochemical 560

level since their overexpression resulted in highly similar phenotypes 561

(Behringer et al 2014) Several of the phenotypes analyzed here namely 562

greening (Fig 1D-F) hypocotyl elongation (Fig 4) plant height branching 563

patterns (Fig 9) branch angles (Fig 9 and Fig S9) silique length seed set 564

(Fig S10) flowering time (Fig 10) as well as senescence (Fig 8) are 565

strongest in the gata quintuple mutant and weaker or in some cases not even 566

apparent in the less complex gata mutant combinations Thus in line with this 567

previous study our present analysis shows that the LLM-domain B-GATA 568

genes from Arabidopsis have a shared biological function in the control of 569

multiple developmental pathways 570

Due to the high complexity of the available range of single double triple 571

quadruple and quintuple mutants we restricted many of our phenotypic 572

analyses to the gnc gnl double the complementary triple and the quintuple 573

mutants It can nevertheless be suggested based on the presently available 574

data that some phenotypes are predominantly controlled by a single LLM-575

domain B-GATA or rather an LLM-domain B-GATA gene pair Phyllotactic 576

patterning as assessed here in the inflorescence is impaired in the gata triple 577

but not in the gnc gnl double mutant (Fig 7) Similarly the increases in floral 578

organ numbers are already very prominent in the gata17 gata17l double 579

mutants and not much more enhanced in the gata triple or quintuple mutant 580

that includes the gata17 gata17l mutations (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) Thus 581

the LLM-domain B-GATA genes have shared overlapping but also distinct 582

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

20

roles in the control of plant development The fact that GATA15 gene function 583

is not impaired in the selected GATA15 gene insertion allele does not allow us 584

to draw any direct conclusions on the biological function of this gene based on 585

the data presented here Furthermore the fact that the mutant alleles of 586

GATA16 and GATA17 used in the complex mutants are only partially 587

defective in GATA gene expression could suggest that even stronger 588

phenotypes may be observed if loss-of-function alleles were used The two 589

strong alleles for GATA15 (gata15-2) and GATA17 (gata17-2) isolated here 590

but analyzed only as single mutants may help in the future to understand the 591

biological function of these GATA genes at further depth 592

It is interesting that the overexpression lines and the mutants of these GATA 593

genes frequently have antagonistic phenotypes This study in combination 594

with a previous study identifies such antagonistically regulated phenotypes in 595

the control of greening hypocotyl elongation branch angle formation 596

flowering time and senescence (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 597

Particularly in the case of transcription factors where the loss-of-function or 598

overexpression may affect the expression of many downstream targets genes 599

and developmental responses triggered by these target genes one may not 600

expect such a clear antagonistic relationship between mutants with reduced 601

gene functions and the overexpressors In view of the fact that 602

overexpressors likely also control the expression of genes that are normally 603

not targeted by this transcription factor when expressed from their native 604

promoter (off-targets) this observation is even more striking It may suggest 605

that the GATAs examined here control developmental responses in a dosage-606

dependent manner together with other critical factors In this context the 607

presence and abundance of the GATAs would just modulate the response but 608

would by itself not be sufficient to trigger it Further analyses will be required 609

to gain a more detailed understanding of the mode of action of the LLM-610

domain B-GATA factors in the control of gene expression 611

We had previously shown that the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 612

repress flowering since their loss-of-function mutants and overexpressors 613

displayed an early and late flowering phenotype respectively when plants 614

were grown in long-day conditions (Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) 615

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

21

We furthermore showed that the control of flowering is partially mediated by 616

the flowering time regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION 617

OF CONSTANS1) which acts downstream from GNC and GNL and whose 618

promoter can be directly bound by GNC and GNL (Richter et al 2013) In line 619

with these previous observations we show here that the complex GATA gene 620

mutants flower even earlier than the gnc gnl mutant further substantiating our 621

conclusion that LLM-domain B-GATAs are flowering time regulators in 622

Arabidopsis (Fig 10B and Fig S11) Surprisingly the complex gata mutants 623

flowered late when grown in short day conditions and their phenotype was 624

thereby antagonistic to the phenotype observed in long days (Fig 10C and 625

Fig S9) The reason for this antagonistic flowering time behavior remains to 626

be resolved but a complex scenario may be envisioned We also do not want 627

to rule out that physiological parameters become limiting in the induction of 628

flowering in the gata mutants Long term defects as a result of their reduced 629

greening may play a limiting role during the extended growth in short days 630

with short illumination periods that are not limiting when plants are grown in 631

long days 632

Several of our phenotypic analyses suggested that the LLM-domain B-GATAs 633

act in concert to control specific phenotypes The fact that at least some of the 634

phenotypes were most pronounced in the quintuple mutant and not apparent 635

or only weak in the less complex mutants suggests that the LLM-domain B-636

GATAs may cross-regulate their expression and that presence and absence 637

of one GATA could interfere with the abundance of other GATA family 638

members We have analyzed this hypothesis here by examining the 639

expression of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 640

GATA17L in the gnc gnl mutant and in the GNL overexpression line (Fig 11A) 641

In both cases we found the expression of three of the four analyzed genes to 642

be differentially regulated in the two genetic backgrounds suggesting that the 643

GATAs can cross-regulate their gene expression and supporting again the 644

hypothesis that the GATAs have a repressive activity on the transcription of 645

the other GATA genes Further support for such a hypothetical cross-646

regulation came from a ChIP-seq analysis with GNL where we observed a 647

strong binding of GNL when expressed from its own promoter to the three 648

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

14

treated leaves (Fig 8F) Here we found that the effects of the senescence 411

treatment were less efficiently suppressed by CK treatments in the gnc gnl 412

double and in the quintuple mutant than in the wild type or the triple mutant 413

(Fig 8A - F) Similarly we observed a stronger effect on the decreases in 414

chlorophyll and total protein levels in the gnc gnl as well as the quintuple 415

mutant when we transferred light-grown plants for four days to the dark (Fig 416

8G ndash I) As previously reported GNL overexpressing plants (GNLox) had 417

senescence phenotypes that were antagonistic to the ones observed with the 418

mutants (Fig 8) (Behringer et al 2014) In the case of the leaf floating assay 419

CK-treatment had a stronger effect on greening and chlorophyll abundance in 420

GNLox than in the wild type (Fig 8A ndash F) When we transferred plants from 421

the light to the dark GNLox seedlings remained visibly green and did not 422

display the strong decrease in total protein abundance that we observed in 423

the wild type or the GATA gene mutants (Fig 8G ndash I) We thus concluded that 424

GATA gene mutants and overexpressors have antagonistic effects with 425

regard to the regulation of senescence and that GNC and GNL contribute 426

particularly strongly to this phenotype 427

CK induces greening in light-grown seedlings (Kobayashi et al 2012) To 428

examine to what extent CK can induce chlorophyll accumulation in the gata 429

mutants we grew plants for two weeks in constant light on medium containing 430

CK (5 nM BA) or a corresponding CK-free medium As expected chlorophyll 431

content was increased in wild type plants but this increase was neither 432

significant in the gnc gnl nor the triple or the quintuple mutants (Fig S7) We 433

thus concluded that the GATA factors are required for CK-induced greening in 434

Arabidopsis seedlings 435

It was previously reported that hypocotyl elongation could be repressed by 436

incubating dark-grown seedlings in the presence of CK (Su and Howell 1995) 437

Since the GATA gene mutants had displayed a hypocotyl elongation defect in 438

light-grown seedlings (Fig 4) we also explored the link between hypocotyl 439

elongation and CK However when we tested the effects of CK on hypocotyl 440

elongation in dark-grown seedlings we did not detect any significant 441

differences in the response between the different genotypes tested (Fig S8) 442

It is thus unlikely that the GATA genes participate in this elongation response 443

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

15

Branching is another phenotype that has been attributed to defects in CK 444

biosynthesis and response (El-Showk et al 2013) When we analyzed the 445

general habitus of the quintuple mutants we noted that they had an increased 446

number of secondary branches that was combined with a reduced plant 447

height (Fig 9A - C) Occasionally we also observed the outgrowth of 448

inflorescences in the axils of lateral inflorescences in the mutants whereas we 449

had not noted this phenotype in the wild type (Fig 9D and E) A quantitative 450

analysis of these phenotypes over all gata mutant phenotypes revealed that 451

the number of first and second order lateral branches increased with 452

increasing mutant complexity (Fig 9B) Here we observed strong effects 453

already in the gata17 gata17l mutant as well as the gnc gnl double mutant but 454

strongest defects in the triple and the quintuple mutant thus all five GATA 455

genes may contribute to this phenotype (Fig 9B) At the same time plant 456

height was reduced to a significant but still minor level in these mutants 457

suggesting that decreases in plant height which may have indirect 458

consequences on the general plant habitus and branching are not the 459

primary cause for altered branching patterns in the gata mutants (Fig 9C) It 460

is further important to note that the higher order GATA gene mutants initiated 461

fewer vegetative buds but had a higher number of growing buds as reflected 462

by the increased branch numbers (Fig 9F) Thus axillary bud formation is 463

promoted and bud outgrowth is repressed by the GATAs in the wild type 464

Another phenotype that became apparent during our analysis of the gata 465

mutant plant habitus was an increase in the angle formed between the 466

primary inflorescence and the lateral inflorescences (Fig 9G and H Fig S9) 467

gata mutants had a decreased angle formed between the primary 468

inflorescence and lateral inflorescences and this phenotype was strongest in 469

the quintuple mutant and intermediate in the gnc gnl and triple mutants (Fig 470

9G and H Fig S9) Interestingly we had previously observed increased 471

branch angles in GATA overexpression lines such as GNLox (Fig S9) 472

(Behringer et al 2014) We thus concluded that GATA gene mutants and 473

overexpressors antagonistically regulate branch angles in Arabidopsis 474

475

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

16

GATA genes regulate petal and sepal numbers as well as silique length 476

CK signaling has recently been implicated in the control of floral development 477

(Han et al 2014) When we analyzed gata mutant flowers in more detail we 478

noted with interest aberrations in floral organ numbers in comparison to the 479

wild type (Fig 10A) Whereas wild type flowers have generally four sepals 480

and four petals and only rarely deviate from this pattern (in our study in 481

around 2 of the cases) a strong increase in flowers with more than four 482

(generally five in rare cases six) petals and sepals became apparent in the 483

higher order gata mutants (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) In the gata17 gata17l 484

mutants we observed flowers with more than four sepals and petals in 12 of 485

all flowers and this number was slightly enhanced in the triple mutant (13 486

petals) and the quintuple mutant (14 petals) (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) 487

Importantly the single mutants with the clearest apparent effect were the 488

gata17 and gata17l mutants and inversely mutations in GNC and GNL 489

contributed only to a minor extent to this phenotype (Fig S10A) In summary 490

this analysis revealed that GATA17 and GATA17L make a particularly strong 491

contribution to the floral morphology phenotype of the gata mutants 492

Since we had previously noted that overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-493

GATAs have short siliques and a reduced number of seeds per silique we 494

also analyzed silique length and seed set in the gata mutants (Fig S10B - D) 495

In line with an antagonistic regulation of these traits in the gata mutants we 496

measured significant increases in seed set in the siliques of the gnc gnl the 497

triple as well as the quintuple mutants and we detected significant increases 498

in silique length in all mutant backgrounds (Fig S10B - D) We thus concluded 499

that the GATA genes repress silique elongation and seed set in the wild type 500

at least to a minor extent A differential contribution of individual GATAs to 501

these phenotypes could however not be resolved here 502

503

GATA gene mutants have antagonistic effects on flowering time in long 504

and short days Accelerated flowering in plants grown under long-day 505

conditions was another phenotype previously described for gnc gnl mutants 506

(Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) Conversely overexpression of the 507

LLM-domain B-GATAs causes a strong delay in flowering (Richter et al 508

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

17

2010 Richter et al 2013 Behringer et al 2014) To examine the contribution 509

of the other GATA factors to the flowering time phenotype we grew the gata 510

mutant series in long day and short day conditions with a 16 hr and 8 hr light 511

period respectively (Fig 10B and C Fig S11) Interestingly we observed a 512

gradual acceleration of flowering in long day-grown plants that was weakest in 513

the single mutants more pronounced in the double triple quadruple mutants 514

and strongest in the quintuple mutants (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) 515

We thus concluded that all LLM-domain B-GATA genes examined here may 516

contribute to the repression of flowering in long day-grown plants 517

Interestingly the effects of the reduced GATA gene function on flowering time 518

in short day conditions were antagonistic to those observed in long day-grown 519

plants in that the complex GATA gene mutants flowered much later than the 520

wild type or the less complex mutant combinations when flowering was 521

counted in days (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) We thus concluded that 522

the LLM-domain B-GATAs factors regulate flowering time in long and short 523

day conditions but in view of the antagonistic nature of this regulation that 524

their contribution to flowering time control may be complex 525

526

Cross-regulation of GATA gene expression Since several of our genetic 527

analyses had suggested a functional redundancy between the GATA genes 528

we looked for evidences of a cross-regulation of GATA gene expression in the 529

gnc gnl double mutant background There we detected indeed an increased 530

transcript abundance of GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 531

mutant which could be compensatory for the loss of GNC and GNL (Fig 11A) 532

At the same time GATA15 GATA16 and GATA17L gene expression levels 533

were significantly reduced in GNL overexpression lines (GNLox) suggesting 534

that GNL may regulate the expression of these genes 535

Since these observations indicated that molecular mechanisms may exist that 536

compensate for the loss of individual LLM-domain B-GATA genes eg in the 537

gnc gnl mutants we examined the binding of GNL to the LLM-domain GATA 538

gene promoters after ChIP-seq analysis (chromatin immunoprecipitation 539

followed by DNA sequencing) Here we found that at least three of the six 540

LLM-domain B-GATA genes were bound by GNL after immunoprecipitation of 541

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

18

HA-tagged GNL from transgenic plants expressing a functional GNLHA 542

transgene from a GNL promoter fragment in the gnc gnl background 543

(pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl Fig 11B) Through subsequent ChIP-PCR studies 544

targeting selected regions upstream from GNC GNL and GATA17 we could 545

confirm this binding through independent analyses (Fig 11C) Thus LLM-546

domain B-GATA factors may directly regulate their own expression as well as 547

that of other family members 548

549

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

19

DISCUSSION 550

In the present study we have characterized the six-membered family of LLM-551

domain B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Whereas the family has diverged when 552

compared between Arabidopsis tomato barley and Brachypodium a clear 553

conservation of this protein family can be observed within the Brassicaceae 554

family (Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014) Within the Brassicaceae GNC and 555

GNL GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and GATA17L form closely 556

related LLM-domain B-GATA pairs In a previous study we had comparatively 557

analyzed transgenic Arabidopsis lines expressing different members of the 558

LLM-domain B-GATA gene family from Arabidopsis barley and tomato and 559

concluded that these genes are functionally redundant at the biochemical 560

level since their overexpression resulted in highly similar phenotypes 561

(Behringer et al 2014) Several of the phenotypes analyzed here namely 562

greening (Fig 1D-F) hypocotyl elongation (Fig 4) plant height branching 563

patterns (Fig 9) branch angles (Fig 9 and Fig S9) silique length seed set 564

(Fig S10) flowering time (Fig 10) as well as senescence (Fig 8) are 565

strongest in the gata quintuple mutant and weaker or in some cases not even 566

apparent in the less complex gata mutant combinations Thus in line with this 567

previous study our present analysis shows that the LLM-domain B-GATA 568

genes from Arabidopsis have a shared biological function in the control of 569

multiple developmental pathways 570

Due to the high complexity of the available range of single double triple 571

quadruple and quintuple mutants we restricted many of our phenotypic 572

analyses to the gnc gnl double the complementary triple and the quintuple 573

mutants It can nevertheless be suggested based on the presently available 574

data that some phenotypes are predominantly controlled by a single LLM-575

domain B-GATA or rather an LLM-domain B-GATA gene pair Phyllotactic 576

patterning as assessed here in the inflorescence is impaired in the gata triple 577

but not in the gnc gnl double mutant (Fig 7) Similarly the increases in floral 578

organ numbers are already very prominent in the gata17 gata17l double 579

mutants and not much more enhanced in the gata triple or quintuple mutant 580

that includes the gata17 gata17l mutations (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) Thus 581

the LLM-domain B-GATA genes have shared overlapping but also distinct 582

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

20

roles in the control of plant development The fact that GATA15 gene function 583

is not impaired in the selected GATA15 gene insertion allele does not allow us 584

to draw any direct conclusions on the biological function of this gene based on 585

the data presented here Furthermore the fact that the mutant alleles of 586

GATA16 and GATA17 used in the complex mutants are only partially 587

defective in GATA gene expression could suggest that even stronger 588

phenotypes may be observed if loss-of-function alleles were used The two 589

strong alleles for GATA15 (gata15-2) and GATA17 (gata17-2) isolated here 590

but analyzed only as single mutants may help in the future to understand the 591

biological function of these GATA genes at further depth 592

It is interesting that the overexpression lines and the mutants of these GATA 593

genes frequently have antagonistic phenotypes This study in combination 594

with a previous study identifies such antagonistically regulated phenotypes in 595

the control of greening hypocotyl elongation branch angle formation 596

flowering time and senescence (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 597

Particularly in the case of transcription factors where the loss-of-function or 598

overexpression may affect the expression of many downstream targets genes 599

and developmental responses triggered by these target genes one may not 600

expect such a clear antagonistic relationship between mutants with reduced 601

gene functions and the overexpressors In view of the fact that 602

overexpressors likely also control the expression of genes that are normally 603

not targeted by this transcription factor when expressed from their native 604

promoter (off-targets) this observation is even more striking It may suggest 605

that the GATAs examined here control developmental responses in a dosage-606

dependent manner together with other critical factors In this context the 607

presence and abundance of the GATAs would just modulate the response but 608

would by itself not be sufficient to trigger it Further analyses will be required 609

to gain a more detailed understanding of the mode of action of the LLM-610

domain B-GATA factors in the control of gene expression 611

We had previously shown that the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 612

repress flowering since their loss-of-function mutants and overexpressors 613

displayed an early and late flowering phenotype respectively when plants 614

were grown in long-day conditions (Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) 615

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

21

We furthermore showed that the control of flowering is partially mediated by 616

the flowering time regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION 617

OF CONSTANS1) which acts downstream from GNC and GNL and whose 618

promoter can be directly bound by GNC and GNL (Richter et al 2013) In line 619

with these previous observations we show here that the complex GATA gene 620

mutants flower even earlier than the gnc gnl mutant further substantiating our 621

conclusion that LLM-domain B-GATAs are flowering time regulators in 622

Arabidopsis (Fig 10B and Fig S11) Surprisingly the complex gata mutants 623

flowered late when grown in short day conditions and their phenotype was 624

thereby antagonistic to the phenotype observed in long days (Fig 10C and 625

Fig S9) The reason for this antagonistic flowering time behavior remains to 626

be resolved but a complex scenario may be envisioned We also do not want 627

to rule out that physiological parameters become limiting in the induction of 628

flowering in the gata mutants Long term defects as a result of their reduced 629

greening may play a limiting role during the extended growth in short days 630

with short illumination periods that are not limiting when plants are grown in 631

long days 632

Several of our phenotypic analyses suggested that the LLM-domain B-GATAs 633

act in concert to control specific phenotypes The fact that at least some of the 634

phenotypes were most pronounced in the quintuple mutant and not apparent 635

or only weak in the less complex mutants suggests that the LLM-domain B-636

GATAs may cross-regulate their expression and that presence and absence 637

of one GATA could interfere with the abundance of other GATA family 638

members We have analyzed this hypothesis here by examining the 639

expression of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 640

GATA17L in the gnc gnl mutant and in the GNL overexpression line (Fig 11A) 641

In both cases we found the expression of three of the four analyzed genes to 642

be differentially regulated in the two genetic backgrounds suggesting that the 643

GATAs can cross-regulate their gene expression and supporting again the 644

hypothesis that the GATAs have a repressive activity on the transcription of 645

the other GATA genes Further support for such a hypothetical cross-646

regulation came from a ChIP-seq analysis with GNL where we observed a 647

strong binding of GNL when expressed from its own promoter to the three 648

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

15

Branching is another phenotype that has been attributed to defects in CK 444

biosynthesis and response (El-Showk et al 2013) When we analyzed the 445

general habitus of the quintuple mutants we noted that they had an increased 446

number of secondary branches that was combined with a reduced plant 447

height (Fig 9A - C) Occasionally we also observed the outgrowth of 448

inflorescences in the axils of lateral inflorescences in the mutants whereas we 449

had not noted this phenotype in the wild type (Fig 9D and E) A quantitative 450

analysis of these phenotypes over all gata mutant phenotypes revealed that 451

the number of first and second order lateral branches increased with 452

increasing mutant complexity (Fig 9B) Here we observed strong effects 453

already in the gata17 gata17l mutant as well as the gnc gnl double mutant but 454

strongest defects in the triple and the quintuple mutant thus all five GATA 455

genes may contribute to this phenotype (Fig 9B) At the same time plant 456

height was reduced to a significant but still minor level in these mutants 457

suggesting that decreases in plant height which may have indirect 458

consequences on the general plant habitus and branching are not the 459

primary cause for altered branching patterns in the gata mutants (Fig 9C) It 460

is further important to note that the higher order GATA gene mutants initiated 461

fewer vegetative buds but had a higher number of growing buds as reflected 462

by the increased branch numbers (Fig 9F) Thus axillary bud formation is 463

promoted and bud outgrowth is repressed by the GATAs in the wild type 464

Another phenotype that became apparent during our analysis of the gata 465

mutant plant habitus was an increase in the angle formed between the 466

primary inflorescence and the lateral inflorescences (Fig 9G and H Fig S9) 467

gata mutants had a decreased angle formed between the primary 468

inflorescence and lateral inflorescences and this phenotype was strongest in 469

the quintuple mutant and intermediate in the gnc gnl and triple mutants (Fig 470

9G and H Fig S9) Interestingly we had previously observed increased 471

branch angles in GATA overexpression lines such as GNLox (Fig S9) 472

(Behringer et al 2014) We thus concluded that GATA gene mutants and 473

overexpressors antagonistically regulate branch angles in Arabidopsis 474

475

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

16

GATA genes regulate petal and sepal numbers as well as silique length 476

CK signaling has recently been implicated in the control of floral development 477

(Han et al 2014) When we analyzed gata mutant flowers in more detail we 478

noted with interest aberrations in floral organ numbers in comparison to the 479

wild type (Fig 10A) Whereas wild type flowers have generally four sepals 480

and four petals and only rarely deviate from this pattern (in our study in 481

around 2 of the cases) a strong increase in flowers with more than four 482

(generally five in rare cases six) petals and sepals became apparent in the 483

higher order gata mutants (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) In the gata17 gata17l 484

mutants we observed flowers with more than four sepals and petals in 12 of 485

all flowers and this number was slightly enhanced in the triple mutant (13 486

petals) and the quintuple mutant (14 petals) (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) 487

Importantly the single mutants with the clearest apparent effect were the 488

gata17 and gata17l mutants and inversely mutations in GNC and GNL 489

contributed only to a minor extent to this phenotype (Fig S10A) In summary 490

this analysis revealed that GATA17 and GATA17L make a particularly strong 491

contribution to the floral morphology phenotype of the gata mutants 492

Since we had previously noted that overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-493

GATAs have short siliques and a reduced number of seeds per silique we 494

also analyzed silique length and seed set in the gata mutants (Fig S10B - D) 495

In line with an antagonistic regulation of these traits in the gata mutants we 496

measured significant increases in seed set in the siliques of the gnc gnl the 497

triple as well as the quintuple mutants and we detected significant increases 498

in silique length in all mutant backgrounds (Fig S10B - D) We thus concluded 499

that the GATA genes repress silique elongation and seed set in the wild type 500

at least to a minor extent A differential contribution of individual GATAs to 501

these phenotypes could however not be resolved here 502

503

GATA gene mutants have antagonistic effects on flowering time in long 504

and short days Accelerated flowering in plants grown under long-day 505

conditions was another phenotype previously described for gnc gnl mutants 506

(Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) Conversely overexpression of the 507

LLM-domain B-GATAs causes a strong delay in flowering (Richter et al 508

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

17

2010 Richter et al 2013 Behringer et al 2014) To examine the contribution 509

of the other GATA factors to the flowering time phenotype we grew the gata 510

mutant series in long day and short day conditions with a 16 hr and 8 hr light 511

period respectively (Fig 10B and C Fig S11) Interestingly we observed a 512

gradual acceleration of flowering in long day-grown plants that was weakest in 513

the single mutants more pronounced in the double triple quadruple mutants 514

and strongest in the quintuple mutants (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) 515

We thus concluded that all LLM-domain B-GATA genes examined here may 516

contribute to the repression of flowering in long day-grown plants 517

Interestingly the effects of the reduced GATA gene function on flowering time 518

in short day conditions were antagonistic to those observed in long day-grown 519

plants in that the complex GATA gene mutants flowered much later than the 520

wild type or the less complex mutant combinations when flowering was 521

counted in days (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) We thus concluded that 522

the LLM-domain B-GATAs factors regulate flowering time in long and short 523

day conditions but in view of the antagonistic nature of this regulation that 524

their contribution to flowering time control may be complex 525

526

Cross-regulation of GATA gene expression Since several of our genetic 527

analyses had suggested a functional redundancy between the GATA genes 528

we looked for evidences of a cross-regulation of GATA gene expression in the 529

gnc gnl double mutant background There we detected indeed an increased 530

transcript abundance of GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 531

mutant which could be compensatory for the loss of GNC and GNL (Fig 11A) 532

At the same time GATA15 GATA16 and GATA17L gene expression levels 533

were significantly reduced in GNL overexpression lines (GNLox) suggesting 534

that GNL may regulate the expression of these genes 535

Since these observations indicated that molecular mechanisms may exist that 536

compensate for the loss of individual LLM-domain B-GATA genes eg in the 537

gnc gnl mutants we examined the binding of GNL to the LLM-domain GATA 538

gene promoters after ChIP-seq analysis (chromatin immunoprecipitation 539

followed by DNA sequencing) Here we found that at least three of the six 540

LLM-domain B-GATA genes were bound by GNL after immunoprecipitation of 541

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

18

HA-tagged GNL from transgenic plants expressing a functional GNLHA 542

transgene from a GNL promoter fragment in the gnc gnl background 543

(pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl Fig 11B) Through subsequent ChIP-PCR studies 544

targeting selected regions upstream from GNC GNL and GATA17 we could 545

confirm this binding through independent analyses (Fig 11C) Thus LLM-546

domain B-GATA factors may directly regulate their own expression as well as 547

that of other family members 548

549

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

19

DISCUSSION 550

In the present study we have characterized the six-membered family of LLM-551

domain B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Whereas the family has diverged when 552

compared between Arabidopsis tomato barley and Brachypodium a clear 553

conservation of this protein family can be observed within the Brassicaceae 554

family (Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014) Within the Brassicaceae GNC and 555

GNL GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and GATA17L form closely 556

related LLM-domain B-GATA pairs In a previous study we had comparatively 557

analyzed transgenic Arabidopsis lines expressing different members of the 558

LLM-domain B-GATA gene family from Arabidopsis barley and tomato and 559

concluded that these genes are functionally redundant at the biochemical 560

level since their overexpression resulted in highly similar phenotypes 561

(Behringer et al 2014) Several of the phenotypes analyzed here namely 562

greening (Fig 1D-F) hypocotyl elongation (Fig 4) plant height branching 563

patterns (Fig 9) branch angles (Fig 9 and Fig S9) silique length seed set 564

(Fig S10) flowering time (Fig 10) as well as senescence (Fig 8) are 565

strongest in the gata quintuple mutant and weaker or in some cases not even 566

apparent in the less complex gata mutant combinations Thus in line with this 567

previous study our present analysis shows that the LLM-domain B-GATA 568

genes from Arabidopsis have a shared biological function in the control of 569

multiple developmental pathways 570

Due to the high complexity of the available range of single double triple 571

quadruple and quintuple mutants we restricted many of our phenotypic 572

analyses to the gnc gnl double the complementary triple and the quintuple 573

mutants It can nevertheless be suggested based on the presently available 574

data that some phenotypes are predominantly controlled by a single LLM-575

domain B-GATA or rather an LLM-domain B-GATA gene pair Phyllotactic 576

patterning as assessed here in the inflorescence is impaired in the gata triple 577

but not in the gnc gnl double mutant (Fig 7) Similarly the increases in floral 578

organ numbers are already very prominent in the gata17 gata17l double 579

mutants and not much more enhanced in the gata triple or quintuple mutant 580

that includes the gata17 gata17l mutations (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) Thus 581

the LLM-domain B-GATA genes have shared overlapping but also distinct 582

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

20

roles in the control of plant development The fact that GATA15 gene function 583

is not impaired in the selected GATA15 gene insertion allele does not allow us 584

to draw any direct conclusions on the biological function of this gene based on 585

the data presented here Furthermore the fact that the mutant alleles of 586

GATA16 and GATA17 used in the complex mutants are only partially 587

defective in GATA gene expression could suggest that even stronger 588

phenotypes may be observed if loss-of-function alleles were used The two 589

strong alleles for GATA15 (gata15-2) and GATA17 (gata17-2) isolated here 590

but analyzed only as single mutants may help in the future to understand the 591

biological function of these GATA genes at further depth 592

It is interesting that the overexpression lines and the mutants of these GATA 593

genes frequently have antagonistic phenotypes This study in combination 594

with a previous study identifies such antagonistically regulated phenotypes in 595

the control of greening hypocotyl elongation branch angle formation 596

flowering time and senescence (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 597

Particularly in the case of transcription factors where the loss-of-function or 598

overexpression may affect the expression of many downstream targets genes 599

and developmental responses triggered by these target genes one may not 600

expect such a clear antagonistic relationship between mutants with reduced 601

gene functions and the overexpressors In view of the fact that 602

overexpressors likely also control the expression of genes that are normally 603

not targeted by this transcription factor when expressed from their native 604

promoter (off-targets) this observation is even more striking It may suggest 605

that the GATAs examined here control developmental responses in a dosage-606

dependent manner together with other critical factors In this context the 607

presence and abundance of the GATAs would just modulate the response but 608

would by itself not be sufficient to trigger it Further analyses will be required 609

to gain a more detailed understanding of the mode of action of the LLM-610

domain B-GATA factors in the control of gene expression 611

We had previously shown that the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 612

repress flowering since their loss-of-function mutants and overexpressors 613

displayed an early and late flowering phenotype respectively when plants 614

were grown in long-day conditions (Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) 615

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

21

We furthermore showed that the control of flowering is partially mediated by 616

the flowering time regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION 617

OF CONSTANS1) which acts downstream from GNC and GNL and whose 618

promoter can be directly bound by GNC and GNL (Richter et al 2013) In line 619

with these previous observations we show here that the complex GATA gene 620

mutants flower even earlier than the gnc gnl mutant further substantiating our 621

conclusion that LLM-domain B-GATAs are flowering time regulators in 622

Arabidopsis (Fig 10B and Fig S11) Surprisingly the complex gata mutants 623

flowered late when grown in short day conditions and their phenotype was 624

thereby antagonistic to the phenotype observed in long days (Fig 10C and 625

Fig S9) The reason for this antagonistic flowering time behavior remains to 626

be resolved but a complex scenario may be envisioned We also do not want 627

to rule out that physiological parameters become limiting in the induction of 628

flowering in the gata mutants Long term defects as a result of their reduced 629

greening may play a limiting role during the extended growth in short days 630

with short illumination periods that are not limiting when plants are grown in 631

long days 632

Several of our phenotypic analyses suggested that the LLM-domain B-GATAs 633

act in concert to control specific phenotypes The fact that at least some of the 634

phenotypes were most pronounced in the quintuple mutant and not apparent 635

or only weak in the less complex mutants suggests that the LLM-domain B-636

GATAs may cross-regulate their expression and that presence and absence 637

of one GATA could interfere with the abundance of other GATA family 638

members We have analyzed this hypothesis here by examining the 639

expression of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 640

GATA17L in the gnc gnl mutant and in the GNL overexpression line (Fig 11A) 641

In both cases we found the expression of three of the four analyzed genes to 642

be differentially regulated in the two genetic backgrounds suggesting that the 643

GATAs can cross-regulate their gene expression and supporting again the 644

hypothesis that the GATAs have a repressive activity on the transcription of 645

the other GATA genes Further support for such a hypothetical cross-646

regulation came from a ChIP-seq analysis with GNL where we observed a 647

strong binding of GNL when expressed from its own promoter to the three 648

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

16

GATA genes regulate petal and sepal numbers as well as silique length 476

CK signaling has recently been implicated in the control of floral development 477

(Han et al 2014) When we analyzed gata mutant flowers in more detail we 478

noted with interest aberrations in floral organ numbers in comparison to the 479

wild type (Fig 10A) Whereas wild type flowers have generally four sepals 480

and four petals and only rarely deviate from this pattern (in our study in 481

around 2 of the cases) a strong increase in flowers with more than four 482

(generally five in rare cases six) petals and sepals became apparent in the 483

higher order gata mutants (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) In the gata17 gata17l 484

mutants we observed flowers with more than four sepals and petals in 12 of 485

all flowers and this number was slightly enhanced in the triple mutant (13 486

petals) and the quintuple mutant (14 petals) (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) 487

Importantly the single mutants with the clearest apparent effect were the 488

gata17 and gata17l mutants and inversely mutations in GNC and GNL 489

contributed only to a minor extent to this phenotype (Fig S10A) In summary 490

this analysis revealed that GATA17 and GATA17L make a particularly strong 491

contribution to the floral morphology phenotype of the gata mutants 492

Since we had previously noted that overexpression lines of LLM-domain B-493

GATAs have short siliques and a reduced number of seeds per silique we 494

also analyzed silique length and seed set in the gata mutants (Fig S10B - D) 495

In line with an antagonistic regulation of these traits in the gata mutants we 496

measured significant increases in seed set in the siliques of the gnc gnl the 497

triple as well as the quintuple mutants and we detected significant increases 498

in silique length in all mutant backgrounds (Fig S10B - D) We thus concluded 499

that the GATA genes repress silique elongation and seed set in the wild type 500

at least to a minor extent A differential contribution of individual GATAs to 501

these phenotypes could however not be resolved here 502

503

GATA gene mutants have antagonistic effects on flowering time in long 504

and short days Accelerated flowering in plants grown under long-day 505

conditions was another phenotype previously described for gnc gnl mutants 506

(Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) Conversely overexpression of the 507

LLM-domain B-GATAs causes a strong delay in flowering (Richter et al 508

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

17

2010 Richter et al 2013 Behringer et al 2014) To examine the contribution 509

of the other GATA factors to the flowering time phenotype we grew the gata 510

mutant series in long day and short day conditions with a 16 hr and 8 hr light 511

period respectively (Fig 10B and C Fig S11) Interestingly we observed a 512

gradual acceleration of flowering in long day-grown plants that was weakest in 513

the single mutants more pronounced in the double triple quadruple mutants 514

and strongest in the quintuple mutants (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) 515

We thus concluded that all LLM-domain B-GATA genes examined here may 516

contribute to the repression of flowering in long day-grown plants 517

Interestingly the effects of the reduced GATA gene function on flowering time 518

in short day conditions were antagonistic to those observed in long day-grown 519

plants in that the complex GATA gene mutants flowered much later than the 520

wild type or the less complex mutant combinations when flowering was 521

counted in days (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) We thus concluded that 522

the LLM-domain B-GATAs factors regulate flowering time in long and short 523

day conditions but in view of the antagonistic nature of this regulation that 524

their contribution to flowering time control may be complex 525

526

Cross-regulation of GATA gene expression Since several of our genetic 527

analyses had suggested a functional redundancy between the GATA genes 528

we looked for evidences of a cross-regulation of GATA gene expression in the 529

gnc gnl double mutant background There we detected indeed an increased 530

transcript abundance of GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 531

mutant which could be compensatory for the loss of GNC and GNL (Fig 11A) 532

At the same time GATA15 GATA16 and GATA17L gene expression levels 533

were significantly reduced in GNL overexpression lines (GNLox) suggesting 534

that GNL may regulate the expression of these genes 535

Since these observations indicated that molecular mechanisms may exist that 536

compensate for the loss of individual LLM-domain B-GATA genes eg in the 537

gnc gnl mutants we examined the binding of GNL to the LLM-domain GATA 538

gene promoters after ChIP-seq analysis (chromatin immunoprecipitation 539

followed by DNA sequencing) Here we found that at least three of the six 540

LLM-domain B-GATA genes were bound by GNL after immunoprecipitation of 541

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

18

HA-tagged GNL from transgenic plants expressing a functional GNLHA 542

transgene from a GNL promoter fragment in the gnc gnl background 543

(pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl Fig 11B) Through subsequent ChIP-PCR studies 544

targeting selected regions upstream from GNC GNL and GATA17 we could 545

confirm this binding through independent analyses (Fig 11C) Thus LLM-546

domain B-GATA factors may directly regulate their own expression as well as 547

that of other family members 548

549

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

19

DISCUSSION 550

In the present study we have characterized the six-membered family of LLM-551

domain B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Whereas the family has diverged when 552

compared between Arabidopsis tomato barley and Brachypodium a clear 553

conservation of this protein family can be observed within the Brassicaceae 554

family (Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014) Within the Brassicaceae GNC and 555

GNL GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and GATA17L form closely 556

related LLM-domain B-GATA pairs In a previous study we had comparatively 557

analyzed transgenic Arabidopsis lines expressing different members of the 558

LLM-domain B-GATA gene family from Arabidopsis barley and tomato and 559

concluded that these genes are functionally redundant at the biochemical 560

level since their overexpression resulted in highly similar phenotypes 561

(Behringer et al 2014) Several of the phenotypes analyzed here namely 562

greening (Fig 1D-F) hypocotyl elongation (Fig 4) plant height branching 563

patterns (Fig 9) branch angles (Fig 9 and Fig S9) silique length seed set 564

(Fig S10) flowering time (Fig 10) as well as senescence (Fig 8) are 565

strongest in the gata quintuple mutant and weaker or in some cases not even 566

apparent in the less complex gata mutant combinations Thus in line with this 567

previous study our present analysis shows that the LLM-domain B-GATA 568

genes from Arabidopsis have a shared biological function in the control of 569

multiple developmental pathways 570

Due to the high complexity of the available range of single double triple 571

quadruple and quintuple mutants we restricted many of our phenotypic 572

analyses to the gnc gnl double the complementary triple and the quintuple 573

mutants It can nevertheless be suggested based on the presently available 574

data that some phenotypes are predominantly controlled by a single LLM-575

domain B-GATA or rather an LLM-domain B-GATA gene pair Phyllotactic 576

patterning as assessed here in the inflorescence is impaired in the gata triple 577

but not in the gnc gnl double mutant (Fig 7) Similarly the increases in floral 578

organ numbers are already very prominent in the gata17 gata17l double 579

mutants and not much more enhanced in the gata triple or quintuple mutant 580

that includes the gata17 gata17l mutations (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) Thus 581

the LLM-domain B-GATA genes have shared overlapping but also distinct 582

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

20

roles in the control of plant development The fact that GATA15 gene function 583

is not impaired in the selected GATA15 gene insertion allele does not allow us 584

to draw any direct conclusions on the biological function of this gene based on 585

the data presented here Furthermore the fact that the mutant alleles of 586

GATA16 and GATA17 used in the complex mutants are only partially 587

defective in GATA gene expression could suggest that even stronger 588

phenotypes may be observed if loss-of-function alleles were used The two 589

strong alleles for GATA15 (gata15-2) and GATA17 (gata17-2) isolated here 590

but analyzed only as single mutants may help in the future to understand the 591

biological function of these GATA genes at further depth 592

It is interesting that the overexpression lines and the mutants of these GATA 593

genes frequently have antagonistic phenotypes This study in combination 594

with a previous study identifies such antagonistically regulated phenotypes in 595

the control of greening hypocotyl elongation branch angle formation 596

flowering time and senescence (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 597

Particularly in the case of transcription factors where the loss-of-function or 598

overexpression may affect the expression of many downstream targets genes 599

and developmental responses triggered by these target genes one may not 600

expect such a clear antagonistic relationship between mutants with reduced 601

gene functions and the overexpressors In view of the fact that 602

overexpressors likely also control the expression of genes that are normally 603

not targeted by this transcription factor when expressed from their native 604

promoter (off-targets) this observation is even more striking It may suggest 605

that the GATAs examined here control developmental responses in a dosage-606

dependent manner together with other critical factors In this context the 607

presence and abundance of the GATAs would just modulate the response but 608

would by itself not be sufficient to trigger it Further analyses will be required 609

to gain a more detailed understanding of the mode of action of the LLM-610

domain B-GATA factors in the control of gene expression 611

We had previously shown that the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 612

repress flowering since their loss-of-function mutants and overexpressors 613

displayed an early and late flowering phenotype respectively when plants 614

were grown in long-day conditions (Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) 615

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

21

We furthermore showed that the control of flowering is partially mediated by 616

the flowering time regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION 617

OF CONSTANS1) which acts downstream from GNC and GNL and whose 618

promoter can be directly bound by GNC and GNL (Richter et al 2013) In line 619

with these previous observations we show here that the complex GATA gene 620

mutants flower even earlier than the gnc gnl mutant further substantiating our 621

conclusion that LLM-domain B-GATAs are flowering time regulators in 622

Arabidopsis (Fig 10B and Fig S11) Surprisingly the complex gata mutants 623

flowered late when grown in short day conditions and their phenotype was 624

thereby antagonistic to the phenotype observed in long days (Fig 10C and 625

Fig S9) The reason for this antagonistic flowering time behavior remains to 626

be resolved but a complex scenario may be envisioned We also do not want 627

to rule out that physiological parameters become limiting in the induction of 628

flowering in the gata mutants Long term defects as a result of their reduced 629

greening may play a limiting role during the extended growth in short days 630

with short illumination periods that are not limiting when plants are grown in 631

long days 632

Several of our phenotypic analyses suggested that the LLM-domain B-GATAs 633

act in concert to control specific phenotypes The fact that at least some of the 634

phenotypes were most pronounced in the quintuple mutant and not apparent 635

or only weak in the less complex mutants suggests that the LLM-domain B-636

GATAs may cross-regulate their expression and that presence and absence 637

of one GATA could interfere with the abundance of other GATA family 638

members We have analyzed this hypothesis here by examining the 639

expression of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 640

GATA17L in the gnc gnl mutant and in the GNL overexpression line (Fig 11A) 641

In both cases we found the expression of three of the four analyzed genes to 642

be differentially regulated in the two genetic backgrounds suggesting that the 643

GATAs can cross-regulate their gene expression and supporting again the 644

hypothesis that the GATAs have a repressive activity on the transcription of 645

the other GATA genes Further support for such a hypothetical cross-646

regulation came from a ChIP-seq analysis with GNL where we observed a 647

strong binding of GNL when expressed from its own promoter to the three 648

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

17

2010 Richter et al 2013 Behringer et al 2014) To examine the contribution 509

of the other GATA factors to the flowering time phenotype we grew the gata 510

mutant series in long day and short day conditions with a 16 hr and 8 hr light 511

period respectively (Fig 10B and C Fig S11) Interestingly we observed a 512

gradual acceleration of flowering in long day-grown plants that was weakest in 513

the single mutants more pronounced in the double triple quadruple mutants 514

and strongest in the quintuple mutants (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) 515

We thus concluded that all LLM-domain B-GATA genes examined here may 516

contribute to the repression of flowering in long day-grown plants 517

Interestingly the effects of the reduced GATA gene function on flowering time 518

in short day conditions were antagonistic to those observed in long day-grown 519

plants in that the complex GATA gene mutants flowered much later than the 520

wild type or the less complex mutant combinations when flowering was 521

counted in days (Fig 10B and C Figs S11 and S12) We thus concluded that 522

the LLM-domain B-GATAs factors regulate flowering time in long and short 523

day conditions but in view of the antagonistic nature of this regulation that 524

their contribution to flowering time control may be complex 525

526

Cross-regulation of GATA gene expression Since several of our genetic 527

analyses had suggested a functional redundancy between the GATA genes 528

we looked for evidences of a cross-regulation of GATA gene expression in the 529

gnc gnl double mutant background There we detected indeed an increased 530

transcript abundance of GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 531

mutant which could be compensatory for the loss of GNC and GNL (Fig 11A) 532

At the same time GATA15 GATA16 and GATA17L gene expression levels 533

were significantly reduced in GNL overexpression lines (GNLox) suggesting 534

that GNL may regulate the expression of these genes 535

Since these observations indicated that molecular mechanisms may exist that 536

compensate for the loss of individual LLM-domain B-GATA genes eg in the 537

gnc gnl mutants we examined the binding of GNL to the LLM-domain GATA 538

gene promoters after ChIP-seq analysis (chromatin immunoprecipitation 539

followed by DNA sequencing) Here we found that at least three of the six 540

LLM-domain B-GATA genes were bound by GNL after immunoprecipitation of 541

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

18

HA-tagged GNL from transgenic plants expressing a functional GNLHA 542

transgene from a GNL promoter fragment in the gnc gnl background 543

(pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl Fig 11B) Through subsequent ChIP-PCR studies 544

targeting selected regions upstream from GNC GNL and GATA17 we could 545

confirm this binding through independent analyses (Fig 11C) Thus LLM-546

domain B-GATA factors may directly regulate their own expression as well as 547

that of other family members 548

549

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

19

DISCUSSION 550

In the present study we have characterized the six-membered family of LLM-551

domain B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Whereas the family has diverged when 552

compared between Arabidopsis tomato barley and Brachypodium a clear 553

conservation of this protein family can be observed within the Brassicaceae 554

family (Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014) Within the Brassicaceae GNC and 555

GNL GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and GATA17L form closely 556

related LLM-domain B-GATA pairs In a previous study we had comparatively 557

analyzed transgenic Arabidopsis lines expressing different members of the 558

LLM-domain B-GATA gene family from Arabidopsis barley and tomato and 559

concluded that these genes are functionally redundant at the biochemical 560

level since their overexpression resulted in highly similar phenotypes 561

(Behringer et al 2014) Several of the phenotypes analyzed here namely 562

greening (Fig 1D-F) hypocotyl elongation (Fig 4) plant height branching 563

patterns (Fig 9) branch angles (Fig 9 and Fig S9) silique length seed set 564

(Fig S10) flowering time (Fig 10) as well as senescence (Fig 8) are 565

strongest in the gata quintuple mutant and weaker or in some cases not even 566

apparent in the less complex gata mutant combinations Thus in line with this 567

previous study our present analysis shows that the LLM-domain B-GATA 568

genes from Arabidopsis have a shared biological function in the control of 569

multiple developmental pathways 570

Due to the high complexity of the available range of single double triple 571

quadruple and quintuple mutants we restricted many of our phenotypic 572

analyses to the gnc gnl double the complementary triple and the quintuple 573

mutants It can nevertheless be suggested based on the presently available 574

data that some phenotypes are predominantly controlled by a single LLM-575

domain B-GATA or rather an LLM-domain B-GATA gene pair Phyllotactic 576

patterning as assessed here in the inflorescence is impaired in the gata triple 577

but not in the gnc gnl double mutant (Fig 7) Similarly the increases in floral 578

organ numbers are already very prominent in the gata17 gata17l double 579

mutants and not much more enhanced in the gata triple or quintuple mutant 580

that includes the gata17 gata17l mutations (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) Thus 581

the LLM-domain B-GATA genes have shared overlapping but also distinct 582

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

20

roles in the control of plant development The fact that GATA15 gene function 583

is not impaired in the selected GATA15 gene insertion allele does not allow us 584

to draw any direct conclusions on the biological function of this gene based on 585

the data presented here Furthermore the fact that the mutant alleles of 586

GATA16 and GATA17 used in the complex mutants are only partially 587

defective in GATA gene expression could suggest that even stronger 588

phenotypes may be observed if loss-of-function alleles were used The two 589

strong alleles for GATA15 (gata15-2) and GATA17 (gata17-2) isolated here 590

but analyzed only as single mutants may help in the future to understand the 591

biological function of these GATA genes at further depth 592

It is interesting that the overexpression lines and the mutants of these GATA 593

genes frequently have antagonistic phenotypes This study in combination 594

with a previous study identifies such antagonistically regulated phenotypes in 595

the control of greening hypocotyl elongation branch angle formation 596

flowering time and senescence (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 597

Particularly in the case of transcription factors where the loss-of-function or 598

overexpression may affect the expression of many downstream targets genes 599

and developmental responses triggered by these target genes one may not 600

expect such a clear antagonistic relationship between mutants with reduced 601

gene functions and the overexpressors In view of the fact that 602

overexpressors likely also control the expression of genes that are normally 603

not targeted by this transcription factor when expressed from their native 604

promoter (off-targets) this observation is even more striking It may suggest 605

that the GATAs examined here control developmental responses in a dosage-606

dependent manner together with other critical factors In this context the 607

presence and abundance of the GATAs would just modulate the response but 608

would by itself not be sufficient to trigger it Further analyses will be required 609

to gain a more detailed understanding of the mode of action of the LLM-610

domain B-GATA factors in the control of gene expression 611

We had previously shown that the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 612

repress flowering since their loss-of-function mutants and overexpressors 613

displayed an early and late flowering phenotype respectively when plants 614

were grown in long-day conditions (Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) 615

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

21

We furthermore showed that the control of flowering is partially mediated by 616

the flowering time regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION 617

OF CONSTANS1) which acts downstream from GNC and GNL and whose 618

promoter can be directly bound by GNC and GNL (Richter et al 2013) In line 619

with these previous observations we show here that the complex GATA gene 620

mutants flower even earlier than the gnc gnl mutant further substantiating our 621

conclusion that LLM-domain B-GATAs are flowering time regulators in 622

Arabidopsis (Fig 10B and Fig S11) Surprisingly the complex gata mutants 623

flowered late when grown in short day conditions and their phenotype was 624

thereby antagonistic to the phenotype observed in long days (Fig 10C and 625

Fig S9) The reason for this antagonistic flowering time behavior remains to 626

be resolved but a complex scenario may be envisioned We also do not want 627

to rule out that physiological parameters become limiting in the induction of 628

flowering in the gata mutants Long term defects as a result of their reduced 629

greening may play a limiting role during the extended growth in short days 630

with short illumination periods that are not limiting when plants are grown in 631

long days 632

Several of our phenotypic analyses suggested that the LLM-domain B-GATAs 633

act in concert to control specific phenotypes The fact that at least some of the 634

phenotypes were most pronounced in the quintuple mutant and not apparent 635

or only weak in the less complex mutants suggests that the LLM-domain B-636

GATAs may cross-regulate their expression and that presence and absence 637

of one GATA could interfere with the abundance of other GATA family 638

members We have analyzed this hypothesis here by examining the 639

expression of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 640

GATA17L in the gnc gnl mutant and in the GNL overexpression line (Fig 11A) 641

In both cases we found the expression of three of the four analyzed genes to 642

be differentially regulated in the two genetic backgrounds suggesting that the 643

GATAs can cross-regulate their gene expression and supporting again the 644

hypothesis that the GATAs have a repressive activity on the transcription of 645

the other GATA genes Further support for such a hypothetical cross-646

regulation came from a ChIP-seq analysis with GNL where we observed a 647

strong binding of GNL when expressed from its own promoter to the three 648

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

18

HA-tagged GNL from transgenic plants expressing a functional GNLHA 542

transgene from a GNL promoter fragment in the gnc gnl background 543

(pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl Fig 11B) Through subsequent ChIP-PCR studies 544

targeting selected regions upstream from GNC GNL and GATA17 we could 545

confirm this binding through independent analyses (Fig 11C) Thus LLM-546

domain B-GATA factors may directly regulate their own expression as well as 547

that of other family members 548

549

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

19

DISCUSSION 550

In the present study we have characterized the six-membered family of LLM-551

domain B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Whereas the family has diverged when 552

compared between Arabidopsis tomato barley and Brachypodium a clear 553

conservation of this protein family can be observed within the Brassicaceae 554

family (Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014) Within the Brassicaceae GNC and 555

GNL GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and GATA17L form closely 556

related LLM-domain B-GATA pairs In a previous study we had comparatively 557

analyzed transgenic Arabidopsis lines expressing different members of the 558

LLM-domain B-GATA gene family from Arabidopsis barley and tomato and 559

concluded that these genes are functionally redundant at the biochemical 560

level since their overexpression resulted in highly similar phenotypes 561

(Behringer et al 2014) Several of the phenotypes analyzed here namely 562

greening (Fig 1D-F) hypocotyl elongation (Fig 4) plant height branching 563

patterns (Fig 9) branch angles (Fig 9 and Fig S9) silique length seed set 564

(Fig S10) flowering time (Fig 10) as well as senescence (Fig 8) are 565

strongest in the gata quintuple mutant and weaker or in some cases not even 566

apparent in the less complex gata mutant combinations Thus in line with this 567

previous study our present analysis shows that the LLM-domain B-GATA 568

genes from Arabidopsis have a shared biological function in the control of 569

multiple developmental pathways 570

Due to the high complexity of the available range of single double triple 571

quadruple and quintuple mutants we restricted many of our phenotypic 572

analyses to the gnc gnl double the complementary triple and the quintuple 573

mutants It can nevertheless be suggested based on the presently available 574

data that some phenotypes are predominantly controlled by a single LLM-575

domain B-GATA or rather an LLM-domain B-GATA gene pair Phyllotactic 576

patterning as assessed here in the inflorescence is impaired in the gata triple 577

but not in the gnc gnl double mutant (Fig 7) Similarly the increases in floral 578

organ numbers are already very prominent in the gata17 gata17l double 579

mutants and not much more enhanced in the gata triple or quintuple mutant 580

that includes the gata17 gata17l mutations (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) Thus 581

the LLM-domain B-GATA genes have shared overlapping but also distinct 582

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

20

roles in the control of plant development The fact that GATA15 gene function 583

is not impaired in the selected GATA15 gene insertion allele does not allow us 584

to draw any direct conclusions on the biological function of this gene based on 585

the data presented here Furthermore the fact that the mutant alleles of 586

GATA16 and GATA17 used in the complex mutants are only partially 587

defective in GATA gene expression could suggest that even stronger 588

phenotypes may be observed if loss-of-function alleles were used The two 589

strong alleles for GATA15 (gata15-2) and GATA17 (gata17-2) isolated here 590

but analyzed only as single mutants may help in the future to understand the 591

biological function of these GATA genes at further depth 592

It is interesting that the overexpression lines and the mutants of these GATA 593

genes frequently have antagonistic phenotypes This study in combination 594

with a previous study identifies such antagonistically regulated phenotypes in 595

the control of greening hypocotyl elongation branch angle formation 596

flowering time and senescence (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 597

Particularly in the case of transcription factors where the loss-of-function or 598

overexpression may affect the expression of many downstream targets genes 599

and developmental responses triggered by these target genes one may not 600

expect such a clear antagonistic relationship between mutants with reduced 601

gene functions and the overexpressors In view of the fact that 602

overexpressors likely also control the expression of genes that are normally 603

not targeted by this transcription factor when expressed from their native 604

promoter (off-targets) this observation is even more striking It may suggest 605

that the GATAs examined here control developmental responses in a dosage-606

dependent manner together with other critical factors In this context the 607

presence and abundance of the GATAs would just modulate the response but 608

would by itself not be sufficient to trigger it Further analyses will be required 609

to gain a more detailed understanding of the mode of action of the LLM-610

domain B-GATA factors in the control of gene expression 611

We had previously shown that the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 612

repress flowering since their loss-of-function mutants and overexpressors 613

displayed an early and late flowering phenotype respectively when plants 614

were grown in long-day conditions (Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) 615

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

21

We furthermore showed that the control of flowering is partially mediated by 616

the flowering time regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION 617

OF CONSTANS1) which acts downstream from GNC and GNL and whose 618

promoter can be directly bound by GNC and GNL (Richter et al 2013) In line 619

with these previous observations we show here that the complex GATA gene 620

mutants flower even earlier than the gnc gnl mutant further substantiating our 621

conclusion that LLM-domain B-GATAs are flowering time regulators in 622

Arabidopsis (Fig 10B and Fig S11) Surprisingly the complex gata mutants 623

flowered late when grown in short day conditions and their phenotype was 624

thereby antagonistic to the phenotype observed in long days (Fig 10C and 625

Fig S9) The reason for this antagonistic flowering time behavior remains to 626

be resolved but a complex scenario may be envisioned We also do not want 627

to rule out that physiological parameters become limiting in the induction of 628

flowering in the gata mutants Long term defects as a result of their reduced 629

greening may play a limiting role during the extended growth in short days 630

with short illumination periods that are not limiting when plants are grown in 631

long days 632

Several of our phenotypic analyses suggested that the LLM-domain B-GATAs 633

act in concert to control specific phenotypes The fact that at least some of the 634

phenotypes were most pronounced in the quintuple mutant and not apparent 635

or only weak in the less complex mutants suggests that the LLM-domain B-636

GATAs may cross-regulate their expression and that presence and absence 637

of one GATA could interfere with the abundance of other GATA family 638

members We have analyzed this hypothesis here by examining the 639

expression of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 640

GATA17L in the gnc gnl mutant and in the GNL overexpression line (Fig 11A) 641

In both cases we found the expression of three of the four analyzed genes to 642

be differentially regulated in the two genetic backgrounds suggesting that the 643

GATAs can cross-regulate their gene expression and supporting again the 644

hypothesis that the GATAs have a repressive activity on the transcription of 645

the other GATA genes Further support for such a hypothetical cross-646

regulation came from a ChIP-seq analysis with GNL where we observed a 647

strong binding of GNL when expressed from its own promoter to the three 648

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

19

DISCUSSION 550

In the present study we have characterized the six-membered family of LLM-551

domain B-GATAs from Arabidopsis Whereas the family has diverged when 552

compared between Arabidopsis tomato barley and Brachypodium a clear 553

conservation of this protein family can be observed within the Brassicaceae 554

family (Fig S1) (Behringer et al 2014) Within the Brassicaceae GNC and 555

GNL GATA15 and GATA16 as well as GATA17 and GATA17L form closely 556

related LLM-domain B-GATA pairs In a previous study we had comparatively 557

analyzed transgenic Arabidopsis lines expressing different members of the 558

LLM-domain B-GATA gene family from Arabidopsis barley and tomato and 559

concluded that these genes are functionally redundant at the biochemical 560

level since their overexpression resulted in highly similar phenotypes 561

(Behringer et al 2014) Several of the phenotypes analyzed here namely 562

greening (Fig 1D-F) hypocotyl elongation (Fig 4) plant height branching 563

patterns (Fig 9) branch angles (Fig 9 and Fig S9) silique length seed set 564

(Fig S10) flowering time (Fig 10) as well as senescence (Fig 8) are 565

strongest in the gata quintuple mutant and weaker or in some cases not even 566

apparent in the less complex gata mutant combinations Thus in line with this 567

previous study our present analysis shows that the LLM-domain B-GATA 568

genes from Arabidopsis have a shared biological function in the control of 569

multiple developmental pathways 570

Due to the high complexity of the available range of single double triple 571

quadruple and quintuple mutants we restricted many of our phenotypic 572

analyses to the gnc gnl double the complementary triple and the quintuple 573

mutants It can nevertheless be suggested based on the presently available 574

data that some phenotypes are predominantly controlled by a single LLM-575

domain B-GATA or rather an LLM-domain B-GATA gene pair Phyllotactic 576

patterning as assessed here in the inflorescence is impaired in the gata triple 577

but not in the gnc gnl double mutant (Fig 7) Similarly the increases in floral 578

organ numbers are already very prominent in the gata17 gata17l double 579

mutants and not much more enhanced in the gata triple or quintuple mutant 580

that includes the gata17 gata17l mutations (Fig 10A and Fig S10A) Thus 581

the LLM-domain B-GATA genes have shared overlapping but also distinct 582

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

20

roles in the control of plant development The fact that GATA15 gene function 583

is not impaired in the selected GATA15 gene insertion allele does not allow us 584

to draw any direct conclusions on the biological function of this gene based on 585

the data presented here Furthermore the fact that the mutant alleles of 586

GATA16 and GATA17 used in the complex mutants are only partially 587

defective in GATA gene expression could suggest that even stronger 588

phenotypes may be observed if loss-of-function alleles were used The two 589

strong alleles for GATA15 (gata15-2) and GATA17 (gata17-2) isolated here 590

but analyzed only as single mutants may help in the future to understand the 591

biological function of these GATA genes at further depth 592

It is interesting that the overexpression lines and the mutants of these GATA 593

genes frequently have antagonistic phenotypes This study in combination 594

with a previous study identifies such antagonistically regulated phenotypes in 595

the control of greening hypocotyl elongation branch angle formation 596

flowering time and senescence (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 597

Particularly in the case of transcription factors where the loss-of-function or 598

overexpression may affect the expression of many downstream targets genes 599

and developmental responses triggered by these target genes one may not 600

expect such a clear antagonistic relationship between mutants with reduced 601

gene functions and the overexpressors In view of the fact that 602

overexpressors likely also control the expression of genes that are normally 603

not targeted by this transcription factor when expressed from their native 604

promoter (off-targets) this observation is even more striking It may suggest 605

that the GATAs examined here control developmental responses in a dosage-606

dependent manner together with other critical factors In this context the 607

presence and abundance of the GATAs would just modulate the response but 608

would by itself not be sufficient to trigger it Further analyses will be required 609

to gain a more detailed understanding of the mode of action of the LLM-610

domain B-GATA factors in the control of gene expression 611

We had previously shown that the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 612

repress flowering since their loss-of-function mutants and overexpressors 613

displayed an early and late flowering phenotype respectively when plants 614

were grown in long-day conditions (Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) 615

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

21

We furthermore showed that the control of flowering is partially mediated by 616

the flowering time regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION 617

OF CONSTANS1) which acts downstream from GNC and GNL and whose 618

promoter can be directly bound by GNC and GNL (Richter et al 2013) In line 619

with these previous observations we show here that the complex GATA gene 620

mutants flower even earlier than the gnc gnl mutant further substantiating our 621

conclusion that LLM-domain B-GATAs are flowering time regulators in 622

Arabidopsis (Fig 10B and Fig S11) Surprisingly the complex gata mutants 623

flowered late when grown in short day conditions and their phenotype was 624

thereby antagonistic to the phenotype observed in long days (Fig 10C and 625

Fig S9) The reason for this antagonistic flowering time behavior remains to 626

be resolved but a complex scenario may be envisioned We also do not want 627

to rule out that physiological parameters become limiting in the induction of 628

flowering in the gata mutants Long term defects as a result of their reduced 629

greening may play a limiting role during the extended growth in short days 630

with short illumination periods that are not limiting when plants are grown in 631

long days 632

Several of our phenotypic analyses suggested that the LLM-domain B-GATAs 633

act in concert to control specific phenotypes The fact that at least some of the 634

phenotypes were most pronounced in the quintuple mutant and not apparent 635

or only weak in the less complex mutants suggests that the LLM-domain B-636

GATAs may cross-regulate their expression and that presence and absence 637

of one GATA could interfere with the abundance of other GATA family 638

members We have analyzed this hypothesis here by examining the 639

expression of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 640

GATA17L in the gnc gnl mutant and in the GNL overexpression line (Fig 11A) 641

In both cases we found the expression of three of the four analyzed genes to 642

be differentially regulated in the two genetic backgrounds suggesting that the 643

GATAs can cross-regulate their gene expression and supporting again the 644

hypothesis that the GATAs have a repressive activity on the transcription of 645

the other GATA genes Further support for such a hypothetical cross-646

regulation came from a ChIP-seq analysis with GNL where we observed a 647

strong binding of GNL when expressed from its own promoter to the three 648

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

20

roles in the control of plant development The fact that GATA15 gene function 583

is not impaired in the selected GATA15 gene insertion allele does not allow us 584

to draw any direct conclusions on the biological function of this gene based on 585

the data presented here Furthermore the fact that the mutant alleles of 586

GATA16 and GATA17 used in the complex mutants are only partially 587

defective in GATA gene expression could suggest that even stronger 588

phenotypes may be observed if loss-of-function alleles were used The two 589

strong alleles for GATA15 (gata15-2) and GATA17 (gata17-2) isolated here 590

but analyzed only as single mutants may help in the future to understand the 591

biological function of these GATA genes at further depth 592

It is interesting that the overexpression lines and the mutants of these GATA 593

genes frequently have antagonistic phenotypes This study in combination 594

with a previous study identifies such antagonistically regulated phenotypes in 595

the control of greening hypocotyl elongation branch angle formation 596

flowering time and senescence (Richter et al 2010 Behringer et al 2014) 597

Particularly in the case of transcription factors where the loss-of-function or 598

overexpression may affect the expression of many downstream targets genes 599

and developmental responses triggered by these target genes one may not 600

expect such a clear antagonistic relationship between mutants with reduced 601

gene functions and the overexpressors In view of the fact that 602

overexpressors likely also control the expression of genes that are normally 603

not targeted by this transcription factor when expressed from their native 604

promoter (off-targets) this observation is even more striking It may suggest 605

that the GATAs examined here control developmental responses in a dosage-606

dependent manner together with other critical factors In this context the 607

presence and abundance of the GATAs would just modulate the response but 608

would by itself not be sufficient to trigger it Further analyses will be required 609

to gain a more detailed understanding of the mode of action of the LLM-610

domain B-GATA factors in the control of gene expression 611

We had previously shown that the LLM-domain B-GATAs GNC and GNL 612

repress flowering since their loss-of-function mutants and overexpressors 613

displayed an early and late flowering phenotype respectively when plants 614

were grown in long-day conditions (Richter et al 2010 Richter et al 2013) 615

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

21

We furthermore showed that the control of flowering is partially mediated by 616

the flowering time regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION 617

OF CONSTANS1) which acts downstream from GNC and GNL and whose 618

promoter can be directly bound by GNC and GNL (Richter et al 2013) In line 619

with these previous observations we show here that the complex GATA gene 620

mutants flower even earlier than the gnc gnl mutant further substantiating our 621

conclusion that LLM-domain B-GATAs are flowering time regulators in 622

Arabidopsis (Fig 10B and Fig S11) Surprisingly the complex gata mutants 623

flowered late when grown in short day conditions and their phenotype was 624

thereby antagonistic to the phenotype observed in long days (Fig 10C and 625

Fig S9) The reason for this antagonistic flowering time behavior remains to 626

be resolved but a complex scenario may be envisioned We also do not want 627

to rule out that physiological parameters become limiting in the induction of 628

flowering in the gata mutants Long term defects as a result of their reduced 629

greening may play a limiting role during the extended growth in short days 630

with short illumination periods that are not limiting when plants are grown in 631

long days 632

Several of our phenotypic analyses suggested that the LLM-domain B-GATAs 633

act in concert to control specific phenotypes The fact that at least some of the 634

phenotypes were most pronounced in the quintuple mutant and not apparent 635

or only weak in the less complex mutants suggests that the LLM-domain B-636

GATAs may cross-regulate their expression and that presence and absence 637

of one GATA could interfere with the abundance of other GATA family 638

members We have analyzed this hypothesis here by examining the 639

expression of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 640

GATA17L in the gnc gnl mutant and in the GNL overexpression line (Fig 11A) 641

In both cases we found the expression of three of the four analyzed genes to 642

be differentially regulated in the two genetic backgrounds suggesting that the 643

GATAs can cross-regulate their gene expression and supporting again the 644

hypothesis that the GATAs have a repressive activity on the transcription of 645

the other GATA genes Further support for such a hypothetical cross-646

regulation came from a ChIP-seq analysis with GNL where we observed a 647

strong binding of GNL when expressed from its own promoter to the three 648

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

21

We furthermore showed that the control of flowering is partially mediated by 616

the flowering time regulator SOC1 (SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION 617

OF CONSTANS1) which acts downstream from GNC and GNL and whose 618

promoter can be directly bound by GNC and GNL (Richter et al 2013) In line 619

with these previous observations we show here that the complex GATA gene 620

mutants flower even earlier than the gnc gnl mutant further substantiating our 621

conclusion that LLM-domain B-GATAs are flowering time regulators in 622

Arabidopsis (Fig 10B and Fig S11) Surprisingly the complex gata mutants 623

flowered late when grown in short day conditions and their phenotype was 624

thereby antagonistic to the phenotype observed in long days (Fig 10C and 625

Fig S9) The reason for this antagonistic flowering time behavior remains to 626

be resolved but a complex scenario may be envisioned We also do not want 627

to rule out that physiological parameters become limiting in the induction of 628

flowering in the gata mutants Long term defects as a result of their reduced 629

greening may play a limiting role during the extended growth in short days 630

with short illumination periods that are not limiting when plants are grown in 631

long days 632

Several of our phenotypic analyses suggested that the LLM-domain B-GATAs 633

act in concert to control specific phenotypes The fact that at least some of the 634

phenotypes were most pronounced in the quintuple mutant and not apparent 635

or only weak in the less complex mutants suggests that the LLM-domain B-636

GATAs may cross-regulate their expression and that presence and absence 637

of one GATA could interfere with the abundance of other GATA family 638

members We have analyzed this hypothesis here by examining the 639

expression of the LLM-domain B-GATAs GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and 640

GATA17L in the gnc gnl mutant and in the GNL overexpression line (Fig 11A) 641

In both cases we found the expression of three of the four analyzed genes to 642

be differentially regulated in the two genetic backgrounds suggesting that the 643

GATAs can cross-regulate their gene expression and supporting again the 644

hypothesis that the GATAs have a repressive activity on the transcription of 645

the other GATA genes Further support for such a hypothetical cross-646

regulation came from a ChIP-seq analysis with GNL where we observed a 647

strong binding of GNL when expressed from its own promoter to the three 648

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

22

GATA gene loci GNC GNL and GATA17 (Fig 11B) Additional studies are 649

needed to disentangle the interplay of the different LLM-domain B-GATAs in 650

the control of plant growth but also in the mutual transcriptional control of the 651

different GATA gene family members to get a full understanding of their 652

biochemical and biological function during plant growth and development 653

654

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

23

MATERIAL AND METHODS 655

Biological material All experiments were performed in Arabidopsis thaliana 656

ecotype Columbia Insertion mutants for GNC (SALK_001778) and GNL 657

(SALK_003995) and their double mutant were previously described (Richter 658

et al 2010) Insertion mutants for GATA15 (SAIL_618B11 and 659

WiscDsLox471A10) GATA16 (SALK_021471) GATA17 (SALK_101994 and 660

SALK_049041) and GATA17L (SALK_026798) were obtained from the 661

Nottingham Arabidopsis Stock Center Homozygous single and higher order 662

mutant combinations were isolated from segregating populations by PCR-663

based genotyping In the context of this analysis it became apparent that the 664

insertion position for one GATA15 allele (SAIL_618B11) was misannotated 665

and that the correct position of this insertion was downstream of the genes 3-666

untranslated region A list of genotyping primers is provided in Supplemental 667

Table S4 In addition the previously described mutants phyA-211 phyB-9 668

(Reed et al 1994) cry1 cry2 (Mockler et al 1999) and pifq (pif1 pif3 pif4 669

pif5) were used (Leivar et al 2008) 670

671

Protein alignment and phylogeny LLM-domain B-GATA protein sequences 672

of different Brassicaceae genomes were identified in the ENSEMBL database 673

(httpplantsensemblorgindexhtml) Sequences were filtered for proteins 674

containing the LLM-domain and alignments were performed using the 675

ClustalW2 alignment tool (httpwwwebiacukToolsmsaclustalw2) Two 676

Brassica rapa genes Bra037421 and Bra035633 were not included in the 677

analysis because no expressed sequence tags could be detected for these 678

annotations and they may represent pseudogenes 679

(httpwwwplantgdborgBrGDB) The phylogenetic tree was generated with 680

MEGA606 (httpwwwmegasoftwarenet) using the Neighbor-joining method 681

and the bootstrap method with 1000 bootstrap replications as well as the 682

Jones-Taylor-Thornton model with gapsmissing data treatment set to 683

pairwise deletion based on an alignment of trimmed B-GATAs using the entire 684

B-GATA DNA-binding domain and the C-termini with the LLM-domain (Fig 685

S2) 686

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

24

687

Physiological assays Unless otherwise stated all plants were cultivated on 688

sterile 12 MS medium without sugar under continuous white light (120 micromol 689

m-2 s-1) For hypocotyl length measurements seedlings were grown for 5 days 690

in white light (80 micromol m-2 s-1) far-red light (weak 035 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 691

06 micromol s-1 m-2) red light (weak 72 micromol s-1 m -2 strong 11 micromol s-1 m -2) 692

and blue light (weak 425 micromol s-1 m-2 strong 10 micromol s-1 m -2) Hypocotyl 693

length was measured from scanned seedlings using the NIH ImageJ software 694

Chlorophyll measurements were performed with 14 day-old plants and 695

chlorophyll content was determined as previously described and normalized 696

to the chlorophyll content of the wild type seedlings grown in the same 697

conditions (Inskeep and Bloom 1985) To visualize chloroplast accumulation 698

and auto-fluorescence pictures of seven day-old seedlings were taken with 699

an Olympus FV1000 confocal microscope (Olympus Hamburg Germany) 700

with an excitation of 405 nm and a detection from 631 to 729 nm The 701

experiments were repeated three times with comparable outcomes the result 702

of one representative experiment is shown For flowering time analyses 703

plants were grown on soil in 100 micromol m-2 s-1 in 16 hrs light8 hrs dark long 704

day-conditions or in 130 micromol m-2 s-1 8 hrs light16 hrs short day-conditions 705

For CK treatments 10 day-old seedlings were pre-incubated for four hours in 706

liquid 12 MS medium and treatments were started by adding hormone-707

containing medium to reach a final concentration of 10 microM 6-BA (6-708

benzylaminopurin) To examine the effects of CK on hypocotyl elongation 709

growth seedlings were grown in the dark for five days on medium containing 710

005 or 01 microM 6-BA or a corresponding mock solution Silique angles were 711

determined as previously described (Besnard et al 2014) To this end a 712

round gauge was built in such a way that it could be moved up the main 713

inflorescence to measure the angles of consecutive siliques The experiment 714

was repeated in two rounds and both datasets were combined Senescence 715

assays were performed as previously described (Weaver and Amasino 2001) 716

In brief detached leaves number three and five of 21 day-old light-grown 717

plants were floated on liquid 12 MS in absolute darkness containing either 718

005 or 01 microM BA or a mock solution After four days chlorophyll was 719

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

25

extracted as described above Alternatively whole plants were transferred 720

into darkness for four days chlorophyll was determined as described above 721

and total protein concentration was determined using a Bradford assay To 722

assess the branching phenotype of gata mutants the numbers of branches of 723

at least 05 cm length were determined from nodes in the rosette and from 724

cauline nodes as well as those of vegetative buds (leaf bearing nodes) along 725

the shoot For scanning electron microscopy of floral buds samples were 726

mounted on pre-frozen platforms and pictures were taken with a TM-3000 727

table top scanning electron microscope (Hitachi Krefeld Germany) Numbers 728

of floral organs were counted at the time of anthesis (stage 13) This 729

measurement was repeatedly performed with all plants after new flowers had 730

formed Siliques were harvested from different plants from a comparable 731

section of the main inflorescence Length and seed number was determined 732

for each silique separately To determine flowering plants were monitored on 733

a daily basis for the presence of a visible inflorescence bud (time to bolting) or 734

petals (flowering time) The numbers of rosette and cauline leaves after 735

bolting were counted 736

737

Microarray analyses For microarray analyses 14 day-old plants grown in 738

continuous white light (120 μmol mminus2 sminus1) were treated for 60 min with CK (20 739

microM 6-BA) or a corresponding mock solvent control treatment Total RNA was 740

extracted with the NucleoSpin RNA Plant Kit (Machery-Nagel Duumlren 741

Germany) and 150 ng total RNA was labeled with Cy3 using the Low Input 742

Quick Amp Labeling Protocol (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) 743

Three biological replicate samples were prepared for each genotype and 744

Arabidopsis arrays (V4 design ID 21169 Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 745

Germany) were hybridized at 65 degC for 17 hrs in rotating hybridization 746

chambers (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Subsequently the 747

arrays were washed and scanned using an Agilent Microarray Scanner 748

(Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen Germany) Total RNA and probe quality 749

were controlled with a Bioanalyzer 2100 (Agilent Technologies Boumlblingen 750

Germany) Raw data were extracted using the Feature Extraction software 751

v10731 (Agilent Technologies) Raw data files were imported into 752

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

26

GeneSpring GX (v 12) and normalized choosing the scale-to-median and 753

baseline-to-median algorithms Data were then subjected to an ANOVA 754

analysis (P lt 005) with an S-N-K post-hoc test and filtered for genes with fold 755

expression differences to the respective wild type controls as specified 756

(Supplemental Table S2) Microarray data were deposited as GSE71828 to 757

the Gene Expression Omnibus database (wwwncbinlmnihgovgeo) 758

759

Quantitative real time-PCR To measure transcript abundance total RNA 760

was extracted with RNeasy Plant Mini Kit (Qiagen Hilden Germany) 2 microg 761

total RNA was reverse transcribed with an oligo(dT) primer and M-MuLV 762

Reverse Transcriptase (Fermentas St Leon-Rot Germany) The transcript 763

levels were detected using a CFX96 Real-Time System Cycler with iQ SYBR 764

Green Supermix (Biorad Freiburg Germany) The results were normalized to 765

PP2A (PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE SUBUNIT2A AT1G13320) in red and far- 766

red light and to ACT2 (ACTIN2 AT3G18780) in blue light Expression in the 767

dark samples was set to one Normalization for the hormone treatments was 768

performed with ACT8 (ACTIN8 AT1G49240) Primers for qRT-PCRs are 769

listed in Supplemental Table S4 770

771

ChIP-seq For ChIP three biological replicate samples (2 g tissue) of 10 day-772

old pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl or gnc gnl control plants grown on GM medium 773

under constant white light were fixed for 20 min in 1 formaldehyde The 774

samples were subsequently processed as previously described using anti-HA 775

antibodies (Abcam Cambridge UK)(Kaufmann et al 2010) and prepared for 776

DNA sequencing with an Illumina MiSeq sequencer The data from this 777

analysis are accessible under PRJNA288918 at NCBI-SRA 778

(httpwwwncbinlmnihgovsra) Sequencing reads were then mapped to 779

the Arabidopsis genome (TAIR10) using SOAPv1 (Li et al 2008) and the 780

following settings 3 mismatches mapping to unique positions only no gaps 781

allowed iteratively trimming set to 41 - 50 Subsequent analysis for peak 782

identification was performed with CSAR retaining only peaks with an FDR lt 783

005 as statistically significant peaks (Muino et al 2011) ChIP-seq results for 784

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

27

GATA genes were independently verified using ChIP-PCR The primers for 785

ChIP-PCRs are listed in Supplemental Table S4 786

787

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

28

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS 788

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within the 789

Brassicaceae 790

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-domain 791

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis 792

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of gata gene mutants 793

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-dependent 794

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets are 795

comparable 796

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 797

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in GATA 798

gene mutants 799

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 800

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 801

GATA gene mutations 802

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short day-803

conditions 804

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering time in long day and short 805

day conditions 806

807

Supplemental Table S1 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 808

mutants 809

Supplemental Table S2 Differentially expressed genes in GATA gene 810

mutants after CK-treatment 811

Supplemental Table S3 Abundance of CK-regulated genes after CK-812

treatment in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 813

Supplemental Table S4 Primers used in this study 814

815

816

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

29

REFERENCES 817

Behringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) 818

Functional diversification within the family of B-GATA transcription 819

factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 820

166 293-305 821

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - 822

insights into their structure regulation and role in plant development 823

Front Plant Sci 6 90 824

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P 825

Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E Farcot E 826

Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y 827

Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014) 828

Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis 829

Nature 505 417-421 830

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE 831

Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive 832

genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis 833

Plant Physiol 162 272-294 834

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic 835

analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor gene family reveals a 836

nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and 837

glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692 838

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon 839

M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functional characterization of the 840

GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in 841

chloroplast development growth and division in Arabidopsis Plant 842

Physiol 160 332-348 843

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W 844

Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen L 845

Vanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G 846

Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers 847

D Bennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling 848

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

30

cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral root 849

founder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706 850

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin 851

signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383 852

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates 853

APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floral 854

meristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845 855

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev 856

Plant Biol 63 353-380 857

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B 858

in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone Plant Physiol 77 483-859

485 860

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V 861

Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EM 862

Angenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation 863

by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89 864

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro 865

EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012) Regulation of 866

root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis 867

Plant Cell 24 1081-1095 868

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different 869

cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes of Arabidopsis thaliana 870

alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327 871

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development 872

Plant Cell 26 56-78 873

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH 874

(2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcription factors 875

repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr 876

Biol 18 1815-1823 877

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide 878

alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714 879

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

31

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream 880

effectors of floral homeotic gene action in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 881

147 707-718 882

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of 883

Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in the regulation of 884

floral induction Development 126 2073-2082 885

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) 886

ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for the statistical 887

detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11 888

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) 889

Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to both 890

light and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 891

71 1557-1560 892

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) 893

The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position the 894

proembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 895

103-113 896

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A 897

and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinct functions in 898

Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149 899

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of 900

transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 134 1718-901

1732 902

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive 903

interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1 in 904

the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in 905

Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004 906

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-907

type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repress gibberellin 908

signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-909

INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104 910

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

32

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) 911

Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulation of the 912

GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc 913

Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 914

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl 915

elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent and additive 916

Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430 917

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G 918

Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns of fractionation 919

and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of 920

paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574 921

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I 922

Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X Freeling M Pires 923

JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG 924

Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song C Duran C 925

Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D 926

Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJ 927

Bonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H 928

Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J 929

Li J Xu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J 930

Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M 931

Links MG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai 932

Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S 933

Sato S Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X 934

Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y 935

Wang Y Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa 936

Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the 937

mesopolyploid crop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039 938

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually 939

darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in whole darkened plants 940

Plant Physiol 127 876-886 941

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

33

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ 942

Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bract suppression in 943

the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578 944

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription 945

repressor HANABA TARANU controls flower development by 946

integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification 947

genes and GATA3 family genes in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101 948

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz 949

EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factor that 950

regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis 951

Plant Cell 16 2586-2600 952

953

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 954

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of 955

Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hosting CS at Tel Aviv 956

University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to 957

thank Jutta Elgner for her excellent technical support 958

959

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

34

FIGURE LEGENDS 960

Figure 1 LLM-domain B-GATAs redundantly control greening in 961

Arabidopsis thaliana A Domain architecture of short and long LLM-domain 962

B-GATAs based on the alignment of family members from Arabidopsis 963

thaliana Protein regions with restricted sequence conservation or gaps in the 964

alignment are depicted as lines regions with low (le 50) sequence similarity 965

are depicted as grey boxes regions with high (ge 80) sequence similarity as 966

black boxes Scale bar = 30 amino acids in a conserved part of the protein B 967

MUSCLE alignment with sequence logo of the B-GATA domain and the LLM-968

domain of the Arabidopsis thaliana LLM-domain B-GATAs C Schematic 969

representation of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-970

GATA genes with exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The 5rsquo-UTR (untranslated 971

region) of GNL and the 3-UTR of GATA16 were previously unknown and 972

derived from RNA sequencing data available in the laboratory The 973

sequences coding for the GATA DNA-binding domain and the LLM-domain 974

are represented as black and blue boxes respectively The T-DNA insertion 975

positions are shown The position in brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers 976

to the original misannotation of this insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) D 977

Photograph of 14 day-old plants with the genotypes as specified in 978

comparison to the Columbia-0 (Col-0) wild type control E Result of the 979

quantification of chlorophyll A and B from different gata single and complex 980

mutants The experiment was performed in two rounds as indicated by the 981

lines above the genotypes to reduce the complexity of the experiment the 982

Col-0 wild type reference was included in both rounds F Representative 983

photographs of seven day-old seedlings (upper panel) and confocal images 984

(lower panel) of these seedlings to visualize differential chloroplast 985

accumulation in these mutants 986

Figure 2 GATA gene expression in far-red red and blue light 987

conditions A ndash C Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 988

analyses of four day-old dark-grown seedlings after transfer to (A) far-red 989

(035 micromol s-1 m-2) (B) red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) and (C) blue light (425 micromol s-1 990

m-2) phyA phyB and cry1 cry2 light receptor mutants were used to control the 991

specificity of the respective treatment and to control for background gene 992

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

35

expression Gene expression data were normalized to the transcript 993

abundance detected in the dark sample of the respective genotype Studentrsquos 994

t-test for selected time points p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not 995

significant 996

Figure 3 GATA gene expression is induced by cytokinin Averages and 997

standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR analyses of ten day-old seedlings 998

that had been treated for the times indicated with 10 microM 6-BA Expression 999

changes for CKX4 are shown to verify the effectiveness of the hormone 1000

treatment The expression values for each time point were normalized to 1001

those of an untreated mock sample The fold change is shown relative to time 1002

point 0 which was set to 1 Studentrsquos t-test for selected time points p le 1003

005 p le 001 p le 0001 ns = not significant 1004

Figure 4 GATA factors contribute to hypocotyl elongation A ndash E 1005

Representative photographs as well as F ndash M averages and standard errors 1006

from hypocotyl measurements of five day-old seedlings (n ge 50) grown in 1007

white light (A and F) weak and strong red light (B H I) weak and strong far-1008

red light (C J K) weak and strong blue light (D L and M) and in the dark (E 1009

and G) Scale bar = 2 mm Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no statistical 1010

difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1011

Figure 5 Differential basal gene expression in gata mutants A 1012

Heatmaps of differentially expressed genes from ten day-old light-grown Col-0 1013

seedlings and the gnc gnl quintuple and triple mutants The experiment was 1014

performed in two rounds with two independent wild type controls referred to 1015

as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-regulated genes are 1016

shown in the upper and lower panels respectively B Venn diagrams 1017

showing the overlap in differential gene expression for down- and up-1018

regulated genes between the three different gata mutant backgrounds using 1019

the respective Col-0 wild type control as a reference Gene expression 1020

identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S1 1021

Figure 6 Cytokinin-responsive gene expression is impaired in gata 1022

mutants A and B Heatmaps and Venn diagrams of differentially expressed 1023

genes from Col-0 and the gata mutants after 60 min CK treatment The 1024

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

36

experiment was performed in two rounds with two independent wild type 1025

controls referred to as Col-0 (1) and Col-0 (2) Down-regulated and up-1026

regulated genes are shown in the upper and lower panels respectively Venn 1027

diagrams showing the overlap in differential gene expression for genes that 1028

were down- and up-regulated following CK treatment in the respective Col-0 1029

wild type and their expression in the respective gata mutants Gene 1030

expression identities and data are shown in Supplemental Table S2 1031

Figure 7 Phyllotaxis patterns are impaired in GATA gene mutants A 1032

Representative photographs of mature inflorescences Arrowheads point at 1033

events of aberrant silique positioning B Measurement of silique angles along 1034

the primary inflorescence of representative wild type and quintuple mutant 1035

plants Note the particularly strong deviation from the ideal silique angle of 1036

1375deg at the basis of the inflorescence C Frequency distribution of silique 1037

divergence angles in wild type and gata triple as well as quintuple mutant 1038

plants Arrowheads mark examples for instances were mutant angles strongly 1039

deviate from wild type angles D Overview over the number of siliques with a 1040

non-canonical angle as observed in the wild type and GATA gene mutants 1041

Figure 8 Cytokinin-effects on senescence are impaired in gata mutants 1042

A ndash E Representative photographs of leaves from 21 day-old plants Leaves 1043

number three and five were detached and kept in the dark for four days in 1044

liquid medium to monitor senescence in the presence and absence of the 1045

cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurin (BA) Scale bar = 1 cm F Averages and 1046

standard deviation after quantification of chlorophyll abundance of the leaves 1047

shown in (A ndash E) (n = 3) Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1048

ns = not significant G Representative photographs of 33 day-old plants that 1049

had transferred from the light to the dark for four days Scale bar = 1 cm H 1050

and I Averages and standard deviations after quantification of chlorophyll 1051

measurements (H) and total protein determination (I) of plants shown in (G) n 1052

ge 3 Studentrsquos t-test was performed for dark samples datasets with no 1053

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1054

Figure 9 GATA gene mutants have altered branching patterns and 1055

branch angles A Representative photographs of seven week-old Col-0 and 1056

quintuple mutant plants Arrowheads indicate positions of second order lateral 1057

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

37

branch formation (white) and first order branches from nodes in the rosette 1058

(blue) Scale bar = 5 cm B C and F Quantitative analysis of branch 1059

numbers (first order branch from cauline leaves first o br cauline second 1060

order branches second o br and first order branches from the rosette first o 1061

br rosette) (B) plant height (C) and vegetative bud formation along the shoot 1062

(F) in the wild type and gata mutant backgrounds n = 15 Studentrsquos t-test 1063

datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled 1064

accordingly D and E Photographs (D) and scanning electron micrographs 1065

(E) of floral meristems and siliques formed in the axils of second order lateral 1066

branches of quintuple mutants which are typically not found in the wild type 1067

Scale bar = 1 mm F Quantitative analysis of branch angles measured on five 1068

week-old Arabidopsis plants n = 19 Studentrsquos t-test p le 005 p le 001 1069

p le 0001 ns not significant G Representative photographs of lateral 1070

inflorescences branching from the primary inflorescence in the wild type The 1071

arrows indicate the angles measured for the analysis shown in (F) Scale bar 1072

= 1 cm 1073

Figure 10 gata mutants have impaired floral morphology and flowering 1074

time A Phenotypic analysis of sepal and petal numbers in the wild type and 1075

the gata gene mutant backgrounds Percentages indicate the penetrance of 1076

the displayed floral phenotype The wild type flower phenotype represents 1077

about 98 of all flowers analyzed the frequency of aberrant flowers is similar 1078

to the one of the gnc gnl mutant B and C Representative photographs (side 1079

views and top views) of wild type and gata gene mutants grown for five weeks 1080

in long-day (16 hrs light8hrs dark) (B) or for ten weeks in short-day (8 hrs 1081

light16 hrs dark) conditions (C) Scale bar = 5 cm 1082

Figure 11 GATA gene expression is cross-regulated in gnc gnl mutants 1083

and GNLox transgenic lines A Result from qRT-PCR analyses of the 1084

GATA genes GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 and GATA17L in the gnc gnl 1085

mutant and GNLox background Gene expression data were normalized to 1086

the transcript abundance detected in the Col-0 wild type B Read coverage 1087

over the six LLM-domain B-GATA genes and 3 kb upstream region after 1088

chromatin immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl 1089

transgenic line (blue line) and the gnc gnl mutant (red line) followed by next 1090

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

38

generation sequencing GATA gene models and where applicable the gene 1091

models of the neighboring genes are indicated in the figure different GATA-1092

sequence containing motifs are indicated below the gene models C Result 1093

from qRT-PCR analyses for selected amplicons (grey boxes) upstream from 1094

the GNC GNL and GATA17 gene promoters after chromatin 1095

immunoprecipitation of GNLHA from a pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl transgenic line 1096

and the gnc gnl mutant Studentrsquos t-tests p le 005 p le 001 p le 0001 1097

ns = not significant 1098

1099

SUPPLEMENTAL FIGURE LEGENDS 1100

Figure S1 Evolutionary conservation of LLM-domain B-GATAs within 1101

the Brassicaceae Phylogenetic tree of the LLM-domain B-GATAs from 1102

Brassicaceae species Arabidopsis thaliana (At) Arabidopsis lyrata (Al) 1103

Capsella rubella (Cr) Eutrema salsugineum (Es) and Brassica rapa (Br) The 1104

underlying alignment is shown in Fig S2 Species identities are color-coded 1105

for ease of viewing bootstrap values are shown at nodes The tree is drawn 1106

to scale with branch lengths in the same units as those of the evolutionary 1107

distances used to infer the phylogenetic tree The evolutionary distances were 1108

computed using the JTT matrix-based method and are in the units of the 1109

number of amino acid substitutions per site 1110

Figure S2 Sequence alignment of the GATA-domain and the LLM-1111

domain Pretty box sequence alignment (httpwwwebiacukTools 1112

msaclustalw2) of the Brassicaceae GATA factors used for the phylogenetic 1113

analysis shown in Figure 1 Sequence conservation is represented by a 1114

sequence logo above the respective alignments Black boxed residues 1115

indicate completely conserved amino acids different shades of grey indicate 1116

residues that are highly conserved between the aligned sequences with 1117

darker grey reflecting a higher degree of conservation (dark grey 80-100 1118

light grey 60-80 white less than 60) 1119

Figure S3 GATA insertion mutant analysis A Schematic representation 1120

of the gene models of the six Arabidopsis LLM-domain B-GATA genes with 1121

exons (boxes) and introns (lines) The sequences coding for the GATA DNA-1122

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

39

binding domain and the LLM-domain are represented as black and blue boxes 1123

respectively The T-DNA insertion positions are shown The position in 1124

brackets of the GATA15 insertion refers to the original misannotation of this 1125

insertion (wwwsignalsalkedu) The image is identical to the one shown in 1126

Figure 1C except that the positions of the primer pairs used for sqPCR (black 1127

arrowheads) and qRT-PCR (green and red arrowheads) were added B 1128

Results from qRT-PCR analyses (left panels fold change refers to normalized 1129

fold change) and sqRT-PCR analyses (right panels) with RNA prepared from 1130

seven day-old Col-0 wild type seedlings and gata gene mutants In the sqRT-1131

PCR experiment genomic DNA (gDNA) was used to control for contamination 1132

A reaction mix with water (H2O) was used to control for purity of the reaction 1133

components The ACTIN2 (ACT2) gene was used as a reference gene for the 1134

sqRT-PCR 1135

Figure S4 Mature plant phenotypes of GATA gene mutants 1136

Representative photographs of Arabidopsis plants at 25 days after 1137

germination (dag) 28 dag 31 dag and 35 dag Please note that the 1138

chlorophyll accumulation defect is maintained in the quintuple mutant but lost 1139

in the other mutants Scale bar = 5 cm 1140

Figure S5 GATA gene expression in red light conditions is PIF-1141

dependent Averages and standard errors of three replicate qRT-PCR 1142

analyses of four day-old dark-grown wild type and pifq seedlings after transfer 1143

to red (72 micromol s-1 m -2) light Studentrsquos t-test for the 12 hr time point gnc gnl 1144

vs Col p le 005 quintuple vs Col p le 001 triple vs Col ns = not 1145

significant 1146

Figure S6 The effects of CK-induction in the two microarray data sets 1147

are comparable A Graphic representation of the CK-induction of ARR 1148

genes from Arabidopsis thaliana in the two microarray data sets reveals that 1149

CK-induction was comparable between the two Col-0 wild type controls as 1150

well as in the different GATA gene mutants B Venn diagrams comparing the 1151

CK-induction (two-fold induction) in the two wild type samples Col-0 (1) and 1152

Col-0 (2) with the ldquogolden listrdquo of previously identified CK-regulated genes 1153

See Supplemental Table S3 for a list of all CK-regulated genes from the 1154

ldquogolden listrdquo 1155

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

40

Figure S7 CK cannot efficiently induce greening in GATA gene mutants 1156

Result of the quantification of chlorophyll A and B from 14 day-old wild type 1157

and different gata mutant plants grown in the absence and presence of 5 nM 1158

6-BA Studentrsquos t-tests p le 001 ns = not significant 1159

Figure S8 The effect of CK on hypocotyl elongation is not impaired in 1160

GATA gene mutants Result from a hypocotyl elongation assay with five day-1161

old dark-grown seedlings Studentrsquos t-tests not significant for all comparisons 1162

between different genotypes subjected to identical treatments (n gt 25) 1163

Figure S9 GATA gene dosage affects lateral inflorescence angles 1164

Representative photographs of lateral branches branching off the primary 1165

inflorescences in the wild type GATA gene mutants and overexpressors 1166

Scale bar = 1 cm 1167

Figure S10 Floral morphology and silique parameters are influenced in 1168

GATA gene mutations A Quantitative phenotypic analysis of sepal and 1169

petal numbers in the wild type and the GATA gene mutant backgrounds B 1170

Photographs of representative mature siliques from the different genetic 1171

backgrounds C and D Quantitative analysis of seed number per silique (C) 1172

and silique length (D) Datasets with no statistical difference fall in one group 1173

and were labeled accordingly (n ge 57) 1174

Figure S11 Quantitative analysis of flowering time in long and short 1175

day-conditions A - D Quantitative analysis of flowering based on leaf 1176

number counts or days to bolting of the long day and short day-grown plants 1177

as shown in Figure 10B and C n = 20 Studentrsquos t-test datasets with no 1178

statistical difference fall in one group and were labeled accordingly 1179

Figure S12 GATA gene mutations alter flowering in long day and short 1180

day conditions Representative photographs of A five week-old plants 1181

grown in long day conditions or B ten week-old plants grown in short day-1182

conditions to demonstrate the acceleration of flowering in long day-grown 1183

mutant plants and the delay in flowering in mutants grown in short days 1184

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

C D

E

Chl

orop

hyll

[]

aa

b bc

d

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gn

l

gata1

5-1 (G

ATA15)

gata1

5-2ga

ta16

gata1

7-1

gata1

7-2

gata1

7l0

20406080

100120

GATA15

gata1

6

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

gata1

7 gata

17ltrip

le

gnc g

nl

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

quint

uple

Col-0

Col-0

gnc gnl

gnc gnl

triple

triple

quintuple

quintuple

GNLox

GNLox

quintuple

gncgnl

tripleGATA15gata16gata17gata17l

gncgnlgata17gata17l

gncgnlGATA15gata16

GATA15gata16

gata17gata17l

Col-0

F

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

short B-GATA

long B-GATA

LLM-domainGATA-domainA

B

Figure 1_Ranftl_et_al

LLM-domainGATA-domain

GATA17L GATA17 GATA15 GATA16 GNL GNC

GNC

GNL

GATA15

GATA16

GATA17

GATA17L

gnc (SALK_001778)

gnl (SALK_003995)

gata15-1 (GATA15 SAIL_618B11)gata15-2 (WiscDsLox471A10)

gata16-1 (SALK_021471)

gata17-1 (SALK_101994) gata17-2 (SALK_049041)

gata17l-1 (SALK_026798)

( )

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

far-red red blue

Figure 2_Ranftl_et_alA B C

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

020406080

100120 GNL GNL

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

20

40

60

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

40

80

120

160 GNLCol-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

dark 30 60 12

018

0da

rk 30 60 120

180

dark 30 60 12

018

0

GNC

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GNC Col-0

cry1cry2 Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 GATA15

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA15 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

ns

time [min] time [min]time [min]

Col-0cry1cry2

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge GATA16 GATA16

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5N

orm

aliz

ed fo

ld c

hang

e GATA16Col-0phyA phyB

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17 GATA17

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17 Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

GATA17LGATA17L

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

0

1

2

3

4

5

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Col-0phyA phyB

GATA17L Col-0cry1cry2

Col-0phyA phyB

time [min] time [min]time [min]

ns

ns ns

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

BA BA BA

BA

BA

BA BA

GNC

143x

148x 155x 157x

289x

136x

GNL GATA15

GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

00

10

20

30

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

12

16

00

10

2030

40

50

00

04

08

12

16

00

04

08

1216

20

Figure 3_Ranftl_et_al

time [min] time [min]time [min]

0 60 120

180

240 0 60 12

018

024

0 0 60 120

180

240

time [min] time [min]

0 60 120

180

240

time [min]

time [min]

CKX4

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

ns

384x

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint

triple quint

triple quint

pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl pifq GNLox

A

B

C

red

light

whi

te li

ght

far-r

ed li

ght

Figure 4_Ranftl_et_al

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

D

E

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quint pifq GNLox

blue

ligh

tda

rk

0

4

8

12

16 a

b

a

a ab b

c

dH

Ga

b

c

a

b

c

d

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

I

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

6

8

L

M

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

8

Leng

th[m

m]

red (weak)

red (strong)

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nl

quint

uple

triple pif

q

GNLox

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

0

2

4

6

a bc c de

f

F white light J

K

Leng

th[m

m]

Leng

th[m

m]

0

2

4

4

6

8

b

c

dfar-red (weak) blue (weak)

dark far-red (strong) blue (strong)

c

d

d

a a

a

bc a b

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (1

)gn

c gn

lqu

intu

ple

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

Figure 5_Ranftl_et_al

-15 00 15

190

1880

87 828

187

211

542

11

89

50

triple (323)

quintuple (4722)

triple (278)

gnc gnl(294)

gnc gnl(2458)

quintuple (976)

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

531 2711

6

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col

-0 (2

)tri

ple

0020 -20

60 min BA

Col-0 (2)(188)

triple (143)

Col-0 (2)(282)

triple(367)

105

104 178 189

83 60

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

down-regulated entities

up-regulated entities

Figure 6_Ranftl_et_alC

ol-0

(1)

gnc

gnl

quin

tupl

e

60 min BA

0020 -20

807

110

115

155

16

77

317

81

14

22

73

139

100

39

Col-0 (1)(996)

gnc gnl (218)

quintuple (504)

Col-0 (1)(365)

gnc gnl (393)

quintuple (281)

A B

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Genotype non-canonical angle n (plants) n (siliques)

Freq

uenc

y

Freq

uenc

y

Col-0quintuple

Col-0triple

0100200300

0100200300

50 010 15 20 25 30 5 10 15 20 25 30

Col-0 quintuple

A gnc gnl triple quintuple Col-0

B

Angl

e [deg]

Divergence angle Divergence angle

Silique

02468

1012141618

02468

1012141618

0 100 200 3000 100 200 300

Figure 7_Ranftl_et_al

Angl

e [deg]

SiliqueC

DCol-0 2044 19 450gnc gnl 2058 23 520triple 3065 20 522quintuple 2953 22 550

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

triplegnc gnl quintuple GNLox

Col-0 gnc gnl triple quintuple GNLox0

1

2

3

4

5

6

70 d dark 5 d dark 0 microM BA5 d dark 005 microM BA 5 d dark 01 microM BA

Chl

orop

hyll

in micro

gm

g FW

F

nsns

ns

nsns ns

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

le

quint

uple

GNLox

0004081216

Tota

l pro

tein

[microg

mg]

00

04

08

12

16 light dark

Chl

orop

hyll

[microg

mg]

HCol-0

Col

-0gn

c gn

ltri

ple

quin

tupl

eG

NLo

x

0 d dark 5 d dark

mock 005 microM BA 01 microM BA

A

B

C

D

E

G

Figure 8_Ranftl_et_al

I light dark

a b ab

c a a ab

a

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Col-0 quintuple

0

10

20

30

40

50

Plan

t hei

ght [

cm]

Num

ber o

f veg

etat

ive

buds

Num

ber o

f bra

nche

s

012

3456 first o br cauline second o br first o br rosette

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6ga

ta17

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

gnc g

nltrip

le

gnc g

nl GATA

15 ga

ta16

gnc g

nl ga

ta17 g

ata17

l

quint

uple

Col-0

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7

gata1

7l

GATA15

gata1

6

gata1

7 gata

17l

A B

C

F

0

510

1520

25

30

a

a

a

a

a a aa

a a a a a

b bab

ab

a aa a a

b

b b

bb

b

c

c

c

c d eed c

dcd

cc

bc

d e

b ba

e

a

Col-0 quintuple quintupleD

Col-0 quintuple quintupleE

Figure 9_Ranftl_et_al

H

40

50

Col-0

gnc g

nltrip

leGNLo

x

quint

uple

60

70

80

Angl

e [deg]

G

ns

Col-0

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

00

05

10

15

20

25

GATA15 GATA16 GATA17 GATA17L

Col-0gnc gnlGNLox

Nor

mal

ized

fold

cha

nge

Figure 11_Ranftl_et_al

ns ns

TGATAG

AGATAA

TGATAA

AGATAG

IP with Anti-HA for gnc gnlIP with Anti-HA for pGNLGNLHA gnc gnl

GATA16250 bp

GATA17250 bp

GNC250 bp

GNL250 bp

AT3G06720

GATA15250 bp

AT3G06730GATA17L250 bp

ATG16143

A C

B

promoter GNC

50 bp 50 bpATG

00

02

04

06

08

10

12

00

02

04

06

08

10

00

02

04

06

08

101214

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

GN

LH

A en

richm

ent (

o

f Inp

ut)

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

pGNL

GNLHA

gnc

gnl

gnc g

nl

promoter GATA17

50 bpATG

promoter GNL

ATG

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Parsed CitationsBehringer C Bastakis E Ranftl QL Mayer KF Schwechheimer C (2014) Functional diversification within the family of B-GATAtranscription factors through the leucine-leucine-methionine domain Plant Physiol 166 293-305

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Behringer C Schwechheimer C (2015) B-GATA transcription factors - insights into their structure regulation and role in plantdevelopment Front Plant Sci 6 90

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Besnard F Refahi Y Morin V Marteaux B Brunoud G Chambrier P Rozier F Mirabet V Legrand J Laine S Thevenon E FarcotE Cellier C Das P Bishopp A Dumas R Parcy F Helariutta Y Boudaoud A Godin C Traas J Guedon Y Vernoux T (2014)Cytokinin signalling inhibitory fields provide robustness to phyllotaxis Nature 505 417-421

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bhargava A Clabaugh I To JP Maxwell BB Chiang YH Schaller GE Loraine A Kieber JJ (2013) Identification of cytokinin-responsive genes using microarray meta-analysis and RNA-Seq in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 272-294

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Bi YM Zhang Y Signorelli T Zhao R Zhu T Rothstein S (2005) Genetic analysis of Arabidopsis GATA transcription factor genefamily reveals a nitrate-inducible member important for chlorophyll synthesis and glucose sensitivity Plant J 44 680-692

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Chiang YH Zubo YO Tapken W Kim HJ Lavanway AM Howard L Pilon M Kieber JJ Schaller GE (2012) Functionalcharacterization of the GATA transcription factors GNC and CGA1 reveals their key role in chloroplast development growth anddivision in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 160 332-348

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

De Rybel B Vassileva V Parizot B Demeulenaere M Grunewald W Audenaert D Van Campenhout J Overvoorde P Jansen LVanneste S Moller B Wilson M Holman T Van Isterdael G Brunoud G Vuylsteke M Vernoux T De Veylder L Inze D Weijers DBennett MJ Beeckman T (2010) A novel AUXIAA28 signaling cascade activates GATA23-dependent specification of lateral rootfounder cell identity Curr Biol 20 1697-1706

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

El-Showk S Ruonala R Helariutta Y (2013) Crossing paths cytokinin signalling and crosstalk Development 140 1373-1383Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Han Y Zhang C Yang H Jiao Y (2014) Cytokinin pathway mediates APETALA1 function in the establishment of determinate floralmeristems in Arabidopsis Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111 6840-6845

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Hwang I Sheen J Muller B (2012) Cytokinin signaling networks Annu Rev Plant Biol 63 353-380Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Inskeep WP Bloom PR (1985) Extinction coefficients of chlorophyll A and B in NN-dimethylformamide and 80 acetone PlantPhysiol 77 483-485

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kaufmann K Wellmer F Muino JM Ferrier T Wuest SE Kumar V Serrano-Mislata A Madueno F Krajewski P Meyerowitz EMAngenent GC Riechmann JL (2010) Orchestration of floral initiation by APETALA1 Science 328 85-89

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kobayashi K Baba S Obayashi T Sato M Toyooka K Keranen M Aro EM Fukaki H Ohta H Sugimoto K Masuda T (2012)Regulation of root greening by light and auxincytokinin signaling in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 24 1081-1095

Pubmed Author and Title wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

CrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Kollmer I Werner T Schmulling T (2011) Ectopic expression of different cytokinin-regulated transcription factor genes ofArabidopsis thaliana alters plant growth and development J Plant Physiol 168 1320-1327

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E (2014) PIFs systems integrators in plant development Plant Cell 26 56-78Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Leivar P Monte E Oka Y Liu T Carle C Castillon A Huq E Quail PH (2008) Multiple phytochrome-interacting bHLH transcriptionfactors repress premature seedling photomorphogenesis in darkness Curr Biol 18 1815-1823

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Li R Li Y Kristiansen K Wang J (2008) SOAP short oligonucleotide alignment program Bioinformatics 24 713-714Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mara CD Irish VF (2008) Two GATA transcription factors are downstream effectors of floral homeotic gene action in ArabidopsisPlant Physiol 147 707-718

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Mockler TC Guo H Yang H Duong H Lin C (1999) Antagonistic actions of Arabidopsis cryptochromes and phytochrome B in theregulation of floral induction Development 126 2073-2082

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Muino JM Kaufmann K van Ham RC Angenent GC Krajewski P (2011) ChIP-seq Analysis in R (CSAR) An R package for thestatistical detection of protein-bound genomic regions Plant Methods 7 11

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Naito T Kiba T Koizumi N Yamashino T Mizuno T (2007) Characterization of a unique GATA family gene that responds to bothlight and cytokinin in Arabidopsis thaliana Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 71 1557-1560

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Nawy T Bayer M Mravec J Friml J Birnbaum KD Lukowitz W (2010) The GATA factor HANABA TARANU is required to position theproembryo boundary in the early Arabidopsis embryo Dev Cell 19 103-113

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reed JW Nagatani A Elich TD Fagan M Chory J (1994) Phytochrome A and phytochrome B have overlapping but distinctfunctions in Arabidopsis development Plant Physiol 104 1139-1149

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Reyes JC Muro-Pastor MI Florencio FJ (2004) The GATA family of transcription factors in Arabidopsis and rice Plant Physiol 1341718-1732

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Bastakis E Schwechheimer C (2013) Cross-repressive interactions between SOC1 and the GATAs GNC and GNLCGA1in the control of greening cold tolerance and flowering time in Arabidopsis Plant Physiol 162 1992-2004

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Muller IK Schwechheimer C (2010) The GATA-type transcription factors GNC and GNLCGA1 repressgibberellin signaling downstream from DELLA proteins and PHYTOCHROME-INTERACTING FACTORS Genes Dev 24 2093-2104

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Richter R Behringer C Zourelidou M Schwechheimer C (2013) Convergence of auxin and gibberellin signaling on the regulationof the GATA transcription factors GNC and GNL in Arabidopsis thaliana Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110 13192-13197 wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from

Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Su W Howell SH (1995) The effects of cytokinin and light on hypocotyl elongation in Arabidopsis seedlings are independent andadditive Plant Physiol 108 1423-1430

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Tang H Woodhouse MR Cheng F Schnable JC Pedersen BS Conant G Wang X Freeling M Pires JC (2012) Altered patterns offractionation and exon deletions in Brassica rapa support a two-step model of paleohexaploidy Genetics 190 1563-1574

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Wang X Wang H Wang J Sun R Wu J Liu S Bai Y Mun JH Bancroft I Cheng F Huang S Li X Hua W Wang J Wang X FreelingM Pires JC Paterson AH Chalhoub B Wang B Hayward A Sharpe AG Park BS Weisshaar B Liu B Li B Liu B Tong C Song CDuran C Peng C Geng C Koh C Lin C Edwards D Mu D Shen D Soumpourou E Li F Fraser F Conant G Lassalle G King GJBonnema G Tang H Wang H Belcram H Zhou H Hirakawa H Abe H Guo H Wang H Jin H Parkin IA Batley J Kim JS Just J Li JXu J Deng J Kim JA Li J Yu J Meng J Wang J Min J Poulain J Wang J Hatakeyama K Wu K Wang L Fang L Trick M LinksMG Zhao M Jin M Ramchiary N Drou N Berkman PJ Cai Q Huang Q Li R Tabata S Cheng S Zhang S Zhang S Huang S SatoS Sun S Kwon SJ Choi SR Lee TH Fan W Zhao X Tan X Xu X Wang Y Qiu Y Yin Y Li Y Du Y Liao Y Lim Y Narusaka Y WangY Wang Z Li Z Wang Z Xiong Z Zhang Z Brassica rapa Genome Sequencing Project C (2011) The genome of the mesopolyploidcrop species Brassica rapa Nat Genet 43 1035-1039

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Weaver LM Amasino RM (2001) Senescence is induced in individually darkened Arabidopsis leaves but inhibited in wholedarkened plants Plant Physiol 127 876-886

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Whipple CJ Hall DH DeBlasio S Taguchi-Shiobara F Schmidt RJ Jackson DP (2010) A conserved mechanism of bractsuppression in the grass family Plant Cell 22 565-578

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhang X Zhou Y Ding L Wu Z Liu R Meyerowitz EM (2013) Transcription repressor HANABA TARANU controls flowerdevelopment by integrating the actions of multiple hormones floral organ specification genes and GATA3 family genes inArabidopsis Plant Cell 25 83-101

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

Zhao Y Medrano L Ohashi K Fletcher JC Yu H Sakai H Meyerowitz EM (2004) HANABA TARANU is a GATA transcription factorthat regulates shoot apical meristem and flower development in Arabidopsis Plant Cell 16 2586-2600

Pubmed Author and TitleCrossRef Author and TitleGoogle Scholar Author Only Title Only Author and Title

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

CS would like to thank Eilon Shani and Daniel Chamovitz Department of Molecular Biology and Ecology of Plants for hostingCS at Tel Aviv University during manuscript preparation QLR EB and CS would like to thank Jutta Elgner for her excellenttechnical support

wwwplantphysiolorgon October 10 2018 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright copy 2016 American Society of Plant Biologists All rights reserved