The role of COP1 in repression of photoperiodic flowering.

Dongqing Xu,Danmeng Zhu,Xing Wang Deng

doi:10.12688/f1000research.7346.1

Dongqing Xu, Danmeng Zhu + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.7346.1

Copy DOI

Journal: F1000Research	Publication Date: Feb 16, 2016
Citations: 24	License type: CC BY 4.0

Affiliation: Peking University, Center for Life Sciences

Abstract

Plants use the circadian clock as a timekeeping mechanism to regulate photoperiodic flowering in response to the seasonal changes. CONSTITUTIVELY PHOTOMORPHOGENIC 1 (COP1), initially identified as a central repressor of seedling photomorphogenesis, was recently shown to be involved in the regulation of light input to the circadian clock, modulating the circadian rhythm and flowering. COP1 encodes a RING-finger E3 ubiquitin ligase and works in concert with SUPPRESSOR of phyA-105 (SPA) proteins to repress photoperiodic flowering by regulating proteasome-mediated degradation of CONSTANS (CO), a central regulator of photoperiodic flowering. In addition, COP1 and EARLY FLOWERING 3 (ELF3) indirectly modulate CO expression via the degradation of GIGANTEA (GI). Here, we summarize the current understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlying COP1’s role in controlling of photoperiodic flowering.

Highlights

In plants, the phase transition from vegetative to reproductive development is controlled by multiple environmental cues, including photoperiod, light quality, and temperature[1]. According to their flowering response to the photoperiod change, plants could be classified as long-day (LD) plants, short-day (SD) plants, and day-neutral plants, respectively[2]
Most advances regarding the flowering-time control were obtained in the model facultative LD plant Arabidopsis and the model SD plant rice
The subsequent characterization of CONSTITUTIVELY PHOTOMORPHOGENIC 1 (COP1) revealed its function in multiple light-mediated developmental processes in Arabidopsis and other higher plants, including circadian rhythm and flowering[6,7]

Summary

Invited Reviewers

F1000 Faculty Reviews are written by members of the prestigious F1000 Faculty. They are commissioned and are peer reviewed before publication to ensure that the final, published version is comprehensive and accessible. The reviewers who approved the final version are listed with their names and affiliations. Any comments on the article can be found at the end of the article. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Introduction

Open Peer Review