Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ETHYLENE RESPONSE FACTOR1 (ERF1) is an upstream component in both jasmonate (JA) and ethylene (ET) signaling and is
involved in pathogen resistance. Accumulating evidence suggests that ERF1 might be related to the salt stress response through
ethylene signaling. However, the specic role of ERF1 in abiotic stress and the molecular mechanism underlying the signaling
cross talk still need to be elucidated. Here, we report that ERF1 was highly induced by high salinity and drought stress in
Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana). The salt stress induction required both JA and ET signaling but was inhibited by abscisic acid.
ERF1-overexpressing lines (35S:ERF1) were more tolerant to drought and salt stress. They also displayed constitutively smaller
stomatal aperture and less transpirational water loss. Surprisingly, 35S:ERF1 also showed enhanced heat tolerance and upregulation of heat tolerance genes compared with the wild type. Several suites of genes activated by JA, drought, salt, and heat
were found in microarray analysis of 35S:ERF1. Chromatin immunoprecipitation assays found that ERF1 up-regulates specic
suites of genes in response to different abiotic stresses by stress-specic binding to GCC or DRE/CRT. In response to biotic
stress, ERF1 bound to GCC boxes but not DRE elements; conversely, under abiotic stress, we observed specic binding of ERF1
to DRE elements. Furthermore, ERF1 bound preferentially to only one among several GCC box or DRE/CRT elements in the
promoter region of its target genes. ERF1 plays a positive role in salt, drought, and heat stress tolerance by stress-specic gene
regulation, which integrates JA, ET, and abscisic acid signals.
1566
Plant Physiology, July 2013, Vol. 162, pp. 15661582, www.plantphysiol.org 2013 American Society of Plant Biologists. All Rights Reserved.
RESULTS
Abiotic Stress Response, Subcellular Localization, and
Expression Pattern of ERF1
1567
Cheng et al.
Figure 1. Expression profile of ERF1. A, qRT-PCR analyses of ERF1 induction by abiotic stresses. Total RNA was extracted from
plants harvested at the indicated times after each treatment. Two-week-old seedlings were dried on Whatman 3MM paper (Drought),
treated with 150 mM NaCl (NaCl), treated with 400 mM mannitol (Mannitol), or incubated at 37C (Heat). The amplification of
ACTIN2 was used as an internal control to normalize all data. The level of the transcript before stress treatments was set to 1.0. Three
independent experiments were performed with similar results. Error bars indicate SE (ANOVA; *P , 0.05). B, Fluorescence microscopy images of Arabidopsis protoplast. Constructs of 35S:GFP or 35S:ERF1-GFP were translocated into Arabidopsis protoplast by
polyethylene glycol transfection. The expression of the introduced genes was detected after 16 h. Nuclei are shown with
49,6-diamino-phenylindole (DAPI) staining. Bars = 20 mm. C, GUS staining of ERF1 promoter:GUS transgenic plants. Three-week-old
homozygous plants (G3 and G6) were either mock treated or treated with 50 mM JA, 150 mM NaCl, 30 min of drought stress, or 1 h of
heat shock stress (45C). Histochemical GUS staining was performed overnight on 10 seedlings for each experiment.
that that ABA-negative regulation of ERF1 could override JA or ET induction. Consistent with this, GUS
staining also showed that ABA treatment could suppress ERF1 promoter induction by JA and ET (Fig. 2C).
Overexpression of ERF1 Enhanced Drought and Salt
Tolerance in Arabidopsis
Figure 2. ABA inhibition effect on ERF1 expression. In qRT-PCR and GUS staining analyses, 2-week-old wild-type or ERF1
promoter:GUS transgenic plants were either mock treated or treated with 50 mM JA, 50 mM ET, both JA + ET, or together with
50 mM ABA. A, qRT-PCR analyses of ERF1 and AREB1 under ABA treatment. Total RNA was extracted from 2-week-old plants
harvested at the indicated times after 50 mM ABA treatment. Three independent experiments were performed with similar results. B, qRT-PCR analyses of ERF1 under different combinations of hormone treatments. Three independent experiments
were performed with similar results. Error bars indicate SE. C, Hormone applications on GUS staining of ERF1 promoter:GUS
transgenic plants. Samples were collected after 1 h of each treatment.
We then examined the role of ABA in ERF1 expression. Interestingly, salt-induced expression of ERF1 was
not impaired in aba2-1 but was reduced signicantly in
ABA-hypersensitive abi1 and abi2 knockout mutants
(Merlot et al., 2001; Fig. 6A). This indicated that ERF1
was connected to ABA both through its effect on ABA
content and the negative regulation of its expression by
ABA signaling.
1569
Cheng et al.
Figure 3. Drought- and salt-tolerant phenotypes of 35S:ERF1 transgenic Arabidopsis. A, Expression levels of ERF1 mRNA in
35S:ERF1 (OE5 and OE6) and ERF1 RNAi (RNAi7 and RNAi15) transgenic plants. B, Drought tolerance of wild-type (WT),
35S:ERF1, and ERF1 RNAi transgenic plants after withholding water for 12 to 16 d and rehydration for 4 d (Recover). C, Threeweek-old plants were irrigated with different concentrations of NaCl solution (100 mM for 4 d, 200 mM for another 4 d, and 300
mM for the rest of the time). These experiments were repeated three times with similar results. D, Survival rates of wild-type, 35S:
ERF1, and ERF1 RNAi transgenic plants under drought and salt stress. Error bars indicate SE (Students t test; *P , 0.001). E, Seed
germination rates of 35S:ERF1 and ERF1 RNAi transgenic plants under salt stress treatment. ERF1 overexpressed and RNAi seeds
were germinated under different concentrations of NaCl. The germination rates were calculated after 3 d (top panel) and 5 d
(bottom panel). Results are averages of three replicates. Error bars indicate SE (Students t test; *P , 0.05, **P , 0.01). F, Root
elongation assays. Three-day-old seedlings were transferred to an MS agar plate with 150 mM NaCl and incubated vertically for
7 d before root lengths were measured. Results are averages of three replicates. Error bars indicate SE (Students t test; *P , 0.05).
To investigate the involvement of ERF1 in the regulation of the expression of abiotic stress-responsive
genes, and to further understand why 35S:ERF1 transgenic
Plant Physiol. Vol. 162, 2013
Figure 4. Water loss in detached leaves and the influence of ERF1 overexpression on ABA-mediated stomatal closure. A, Water
loss from detached leaves as a function of time in Col-0 and 35S:ERF1 plants (OE3 and OE6). This experiment was repeated
three times with similar results. Values are means of the percentage of leaf water loss 6 SE (n = 15). Error bars indicate SE
(ANOVA; *P , 0.05). B, Micrographs representing the dynamics of ABA-mediated stomatal closure in Col-0 and 35S:ERF1
plants. C, Stomatal apertures were measured on epidermal peels of wild-type (WT), 35S:ERF1 (OE5 and OE6), and ERF1 RNAi
(RNAi7 and RNAi15) transgenic plants. Stomata were preopened under light for 2.5 h and then incubated in the indicated
concentrations of ABA for 2.5 h under light. This experiment was repeated three times with the same trend. Values are means 6
SE (n . 60). Error bars indicate SE (ANOVA; *P , 0.05). D, Infrared thermal images of 3-week-old 35S:ERF1 (OE3, OE5, and
OE6) and wild-type (Col) plants.
To investigate whether ERF1 directly regulates abiotic stress-responsive genes, we searched for a common cis-acting element presented in the promoters of
ERF1 up-regulated genes. The DRE contains the core
sequence A/GCCGAC and has been identied as a cisacting promoter element regulating gene expression in
response to drought, salt, and cold stresses in Arabidopsis (Hao et al., 2002; Sakuma et al., 2002). Many of
the ERF1 up-regulated genes contained DRE elements
in their promoter regions. Electrophoretic mobility
shift assays using ERF1-GFP fusion protein puried
1571
Cheng et al.
SRO5, GLP9, and ATOSM34; and the heat shockresponsive genes ATHSFA3, HSP101, HSP70, and
HSP23.6-M, according to Supplemental Figure S5 (Fig.
9A). ChIP assays demonstrated stress-specic ERF1
binding to DRE elements in the promoters of drought
stress-responsive genes (LEA4-5, KIN2, GEA6, and
Figure 5. Pro and ABA contents in ERF1 transgenic plants. Total Pro or
ABA was prepared from 3-week-old Arabidopsis grown on MS agar
plates. Pro contents were also measured after treating with 0.4 M
mannitol for 24 h. Data are presented as means and SE of three replications. A, Pro contents in ERF1 transgenic plants. Error bars indicate SE
(ANOVA; *P , 0.01). DW, Dry weight; WT, wild type. B, ABA contents of ERF1 transgenic plants. Error bars indicate SE (Students t test;
*P , 0.01). FW, Fresh weight.
Gene Name
Product Description
Fold Change
DREa
GCCa
201.76
72.62
21.19
4.60
2.79
++
2
++
+++
2
+
2
+
7.13
5.42
4.82
3.94
3.82
3.15
2.83
2.80
2.75
2.73
2.54
2.44
2.25
2.21
2
++++
2
2
2
2
+++
2
2
2
++
2
++
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
++
2
2
2
2
2
2
Cold-regulated47
DRE-binding protein2A
Multiprotein bridging factor1C
2.90
2.80
2.64
+++
++
2
2
2
++
6.05
5.88
2.95
2.25
2
2
+
2
2
2
+
2
At3g30775
ERD5
At2g41430
ERD15
At2g35300
LEA18
At1g32560
LEA4-1
At2g02800
KIN2
At2g30870
GSTF10
At4g25490
CBF1
At2g18050
HIS1-3
At1g22190
RAP2.4
At4g02200
At1g33560
ADR1
At5g45340
CYP707A3
At1g20450
ERD10
At1g76180
ERD14
At3g15500
ANAC055
1573
Cheng et al.
Gene Name
At1g56280
At3g06760
At1g32640
DI19
MYC2
KTI1
OSM34
NUDT7
GLP9
MYB15
MYB49
SRO5
ASB1
GSTF7
TMAC2
MYB74
NAC6
GDH2
MYB112
NSL1
AOC3
CPK32
FAR4
MYB102
SIS
BT4
MEKK1
BT2
UGT71B6
GSTF8
MAP18
ZF3
GSTF2
MYB51
CIPK9
ZF1
HKL1
VSP2
At5g57560
XTH22
At3g12580
HSP70
At5g03720
HSFA3
At4g12400
HOP3
At4g25200
HSP23.6-MITO
At1g74310
HSP101
At1g07400
At5g07100
WRKY26
At3g63350
ATHSFA7B
At5g47910
RBOHD
At1g21910
DREB26
At3g08970
TMS1
At1g53540
1574
Product Description
DREa
GCCa
2.13
2.03
2.01
+++
+
2
+
+
2
23.14
21.71
20.22
12.29
9.03
8.38
7.96
7.61
5.04
4.89
4.69
4.22
4.10
3.96
3.90
3.60
3.39
3.36
3.18
3.17
3.16
3.14
3.11
3.07
3.07
2.82
2.78
2.77
2.68
2.53
2.35
2.26
2.23
2.20
2.17
2.15
2.10
2.09
2.03
+
+
2
2
+
2
2
+
2
+
2
2
2
2
+
2
+
+
+
+
+
+
2
2
+++
+++
++
++
++
+++
+++
++
+++
++
++
+++
2
+
+
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
+
2
+
+
+
2
2
+
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
+
2
2
+
2
+
+
2
2
2
2
Fold Change
Drought-induced19
Drought-responsive family protein
MYC transcription factor2
8.61
+++
2
8.49
++
2
7.76
2
+
7.47
+
+
6.19
+
2
5.80
++
2
5.12
+
2
4.99
++
2
4.65
+
2
3.92
+
+
3.81
+
2
3.41
2
+
3.29
+
2
2.93
2
++
2.78
+
+
(Table continues on following page.)
Plant Physiol. Vol. 162, 2013
At3g51910
At2g26150
At1g56410
At5g 12030
At4g17250
At5g37770
Gene Name
Product Description
HSFA7A
HSFA2
ERD2
HSP17.6A
CML24
Fold Change
2.74
2.71
2.67
2.43
2.33
2.07
DREa
GCCa
+
+
+
2
++
+
2
2
2
+
2
2
a
DRE (G/ACCGAC) or GCC (GCCGCC) in the 3,000-bp upstream region from the 59 end of the longest complementary DNA.
applicable.
, Not
1575
Cheng et al.
1576
Figure 9. ERF1 binding affinity to the DRE element and the GCC box
in selected ERF1 stress-responsive downstream gene promoters. A, In
the downstream gene promoters, the sequence regions used for ChIP
assays are marked. Black marks, GCC box; gray marks, DRE elements.
B, ChIP assays. Fragments showing significant enrichment are underlined. For ChIP assays, 3-week-old 35S:ERF1-GFP transgenic plants
under normal conditions (Normal), treated with 1 h of 50 mM JA (JA),
30 min of dehydration (Drought), 1 h of 150 mM NaCl (Salt), or 1 h of
heat shock stress (45C; Heat) were used. Three measurements were
averaged for individual assays. The values in Col-0 plants were set to
1 after normalization against ACT2 for qRT-PCR analysis. Error bars
indicate SE (Students t test; *P , 0.05, **P , 0.01).
1577
Cheng et al.
1579
Cheng et al.
glacial acetic acid in a test tube for 1 h at 100C, and the reaction was terminated in an ice bath. The reaction mixture was extracted with 1 mL of toluene
and mixed vigorously with a test tube stirrer for 15 to 20 s. The chromophore
containing toluene was aspirated from the aqueous phase, warmed to room
temperature, and the absorbance was read at 520 nm using toluene for a
blank. The Pro concentration was determined from a standard curve and
calculated on a fresh weight basis as follows: [(mg Pro mL21 3 mL toluene)/
115.5 mg mmol21]/[(g sample)/5] = mmol Pro g21 fresh weight material.
For ABA quantication, lyophilized samples of approximately 100 mg of
whole seedlings were homogenized with 1 mL of 80% acetone and 20% water
(v/v) containing 1% (v/v) acetic acid in a 2-mL round-bottom tube. The homogenate was incubated for 48 h at 4C in darkness at 200 rpm. A total of
300 mL of the supernatant was dried under vacuum. Following resuspension
in 1 mL of 50% methanol (v/v) and 0.1 M NH4H2PO4 by vortexing, samples
were puried by polyvinylpolypyrrolidone (Sigma-Aldrich) and a C18 column (Sep-Pak Vac 3-cc [500-mg] C18 Cartridges; Waters). After washing with
4 mL of 20% methanol and 2% acetic acid, ABA was eluted by 4 mL of 55%
methanol and 2% acetic acid. One milliliter of eluate was vacuum dried and
resuspend in 200 mL of standard Tris-buffered saline buffer. ABA in these
extracts was quantied using the Phytodetek ABA ELISA kit (Agdia)
according to the manufacturers instructions. The assay principle uses the
competitive antibody-binding method to measure concentrations of ABA in
plant extracts.
Microarray Analysis
Three independent biological replicates of microarray experiments were
performed using 4-week-old wild-type and ERF1 overexpression plants grown
under normal conditions. Total RNA was isolated from the rosette leaves using
Rezol C&T reagent (PROtech). One microgram of total RNA was amplied by
a Quick-Amp Labeling kit (Agilent Technologies) and labeled with Cy3 or Cy5
(CyDye; Perkin-Elmer). CyDye-labeled copy RNA (0.825 mg) was fragmented to
an average size of about 50 to 100 nucleotides by incubation with fragmentation
buffer at 60C for 30 min. Labeled copy RNA was then pooled and hybridized to
the Agilent Arabidopsis V4 Oligo 4344K Microarray (Agilent Technologies) at
60C for 17 h. Microarrays were scanned with an Agilent microarray scanner
(Agilent Technologies), and scanned images were analyzed by Feature Extraction 9.5.3 software (Agilent Technologies). Normalization and background intensity determination for each feature were performed. Genes exhibiting more
than a 2-fold enhanced or reduced transcription level in three independent
experiments were considered to show signicant alterations in expression, and
P values were calculated using the Benjamini and Hochberg method (false discovery rate) using GeneSpring 11 (Agilent Technologies).
ChIP Assay
GFP- and ERF1-GFP-overexpressing plants (see above) were used for ChIP
assays and are referred to as GFP and ERF1-GFP, respectively. ChIP was
conducted as described by Gendrel et al. (2005). Briey, leaves (1 g) of
Arabidopsis plants overexpressing ERF1-GFP and pEarleyGate103-GFP were
xed with 1% formaldehyde at room temperature (25C) for 10 min with
gentle agitation. The chromatin solution was then sonicated to shear the DNA
into approximately 500-bp fragments. After centrifugation (13,000g), 300 mL of
the supernatant was diluted to 3 mL, and 60 mL of GFP-Trap coupled to
magnetic particles (ChromoTek) was added. After incubation at 4C overnight, the beads were washed and proteins were eluted. The eluates were
subjected to digestion with proteinase K (Merck) and RNase. Bound DNA
fragments were then extracted using phenol and precipitated with ethanol.
The PCR analysis was performed using equal amounts of DNA from the input
fractions, washes, and eluates in 42 cycles using amplimers for the DNA
fragments (Supplemental Tables S2 and S3).
Supplemental Data
The following materials are available in the online version of this article.
Supplemental Figure S1. Expression levels of P5CS1 in ERF1 transgenic
plants.
Supplemental Figure S2. ERF1 binding afnity to DRE/CRT element in
the RD29B gene promoter.
Supplemental Figure S3. Location of DRE/CRT element and/or GCC box
in ERF1 stress-responsive gene promoters.
Supplemental Figure S4. DNA sonication for ChIP assay.
Supplemental Figure S5. ERF1-binding afnity to DRE/CRT element and
GCC box in ERF1 stress-responsive downstream gene promoters.
Supplemental Figure S6. ERF1-binding afnity to regions without DRE/
CRT element and GCC box in ERF1 stress-responsive downstream gene
promoters.
Supplemental Figure S7. ERF1-binding afnity to DRE/CRT element and
GCC box in ERF1 stress-responsive downstream gene promoters.
Supplemental Figure S8. ERF1 binding preferences to DRE/CRT element
or GCC box in ERF1 stress-responsive downstream gene promoters.
Supplemental Figure S9. ERF1 binding preferences to DRE/CRT elements
in ERF1 stress-responsive downstream genes promoters.
Supplemental Figure S10. Gene expression of ERF15 and ERF94 in ERF1
RNAi transgenic plants.
Supplemental Figure S11. ERF1 promoter-GUS expression in guard cells.
Supplemental Table S1. Downstream genes of WRKY18, WRKY25, and
ANAC055 upregulated in the microarray analysis.
Supplemental Table S2. Primers used in the chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) assays.
Supplemental Table S3. Primers used in the chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) assays of promoter regions without the GCC box or DRE.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank Prof. W. Drge-Laser (Universitt Wrzburg) for kindly providing the seed pool of the Arabidopsis AtTORF-EX library and Paul E. Verslues
(Institute of Plant and Microbial Biology, Academia Sinica) for critical editing
of the manuscript. We are grateful to the staff of TC5 Bio-Image Tools, Technology Commons, College of Life Science, National Taiwan University for
help with the confocal laser scanning microscopy. We also thank Dr. W.-H.
Cheng (Academia Sinica) for providing aba2 seeds, and Dr. L.-C. Wang (Academia Sinica) for providing ctr1, etr1, and ein2 seeds.
Received May 22, 2013; accepted May 24, 2013; published May 29, 2013.
LITERATURE CITED
Anderson JP, Badruzsaufari E, Schenk PM, Manners JM, Desmond OJ,
Ehlert C, Maclean DJ, Ebert PR, Kazan K (2004) Antagonistic interaction between abscisic acid and jasmonate-ethylene signaling pathways
modulates defense gene expression and disease resistance in Arabidopsis.
Plant Cell 16: 34603479
Asensi-Fabado MA, Cela J, Mller M, Arrom L, Chang C, Munn-Bosch S
(2012) Enhanced oxidative stress in the ethylene-insensitive (ein3-1) mutant of
Arabidopsis thaliana exposed to salt stress. J Plant Physiol 169: 360368
Azevedo C, Betsuyaku S, Peart J, Takahashi A, Nol L, Sadanandom A,
Casais C, Parker J, Shirasu K (2006) Role of SGT1 in resistance protein
accumulation in plant immunity. EMBO J 25: 20072016
Baker SS, Wilhelm KS, Thomashow MF (1994) The 59-region of Arabidopsis
thaliana cor15a has cis-acting elements that confer cold-, drought- and ABAregulated gene expression. Plant Mol Biol 24: 701713
Bates LS, Waldren RP, Teare ID (1973) Rapid determination of free proline
for water-stress studies. Plant Soil 39: 205207
Berrocal-Lobo M, Molina A, Solano R (2002) Constitutive expression of
ETHYLENE-RESPONSE-FACTOR1 in Arabidopsis confers resistance to
several necrotrophic fungi. Plant J 29: 2332
Brown RL, Kazan K, McGrath KC, Maclean DJ, Manners JM (2003) A role
for the GCC-box in jasmonate-mediated activation of the PDF1.2 gene of
Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol 132: 10201032
Cao WH, Liu J, He XJ, Mu RL, Zhou HL, Chen SY, Zhang JS (2007)
Modulation of ethylene responses affects plant salt-stress responses.
Plant Physiol 143: 707719
Cao YR, Chen SY, Zhang JS (2008) Ethylene signaling regulates salt stress
response: an overview. Plant Signal Behav 3: 761763
Cela J, Chang C, Munn-Bosch S (2011) Accumulation of g- rather than
a-tocopherol alters ethylene signaling gene expression in the vte4 mutant of Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Cell Physiol 52: 13891400
evik V, Kidd BN, Zhang P, Hill C, Kiddle S, Denby KJ, Holub EB,
Cahill DM, Manners JM, Schenk PM, et al (2012) MEDIATOR25 acts as
an integrative hub for the regulation of jasmonate-responsive gene expression in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol 160: 541555
Chen R, Jiang H, Li L, Zhai Q, Qi L, Zhou W, Liu X, Li H, Zheng W, Sun J,
et al (2012) The Arabidopsis mediator subunit MED25 differentially
regulates jasmonate and abscisic acid signaling through interacting with
the MYC2 and ABI5 transcription factors. Plant Cell 24: 28982916
Chini A, Grant JJ, Seki M, Shinozaki K, Loake GJ (2004) Drought tolerance established by enhanced expression of the CC-NBS-LRR gene,
ADR1, requires salicylic acid, EDS1 and ABI1. Plant J 38: 810822
Creelman RA, Mullet JE (1995) Jasmonic acid distribution and action in
plants: regulation during development and response to biotic and abiotic stress. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 92: 41144119
Ecker JR (1995) The ethylene signal transduction pathway in plants. Science
268: 667675
Elfving N, Davoine C, Benlloch R, Blomberg J, Brnnstrm K, Mller D,
Nilsson A, Ulfstedt M, Ronne H, Wingsle G, et al (2011) The Arabidopsis thaliana Med25 mediator subunit integrates environmental cues to
control plant development. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108: 82458250
Ellouzi H, Hamed KB, Cela J, Mller M, Abdelly C, Munn-Bosch S (2013)
Increased sensitivity to salt stress in tocopherol-decient Arabidopsis mutants growing in a hydroponic system. Plant Signal Behav 8: e23136
Endo A, Sawada Y, Takahashi H, Okamoto M, Ikegami K, Koiwai H, Seo
M, Toyomasu T, Mitsuhashi W, Shinozaki K, et al (2008) Drought
induction of Arabidopsis 9-cis-epoxycarotenoid dioxygenase occurs in
vascular parenchyma cells. Plant Physiol 147: 19841993
Feng JX, Liu D, Pan Y, Gong W, Ma LG, Luo JC, Deng XW, Zhu YX (2005) An
annotation update via cDNA sequence analysis and comprehensive proling of
developmental, hormonal or environmental responsiveness of the Arabidopsis
AP2/EREBP transcription factor gene family. Plant Mol Biol 59: 853868
Fujimoto SY, Ohta M, Usui A, Shinshi H, Ohme-Takagi M (2000) Arabidopsis ethylene-responsive element binding factors act as transcriptional
activators or repressors of GCC box-mediated gene expression. Plant
Cell 12: 393404
Gehring CA, Irving HR, McConchie R, Parish RW (1997) Jasmonates induce intracellular alkalinization and closure of Paphiopedilum guard
cells. Ann Bot (Lond) 80: 485489
Gendrel AV, Lippman Z, Martienssen R, Colot V (2005) Proling histone
modication patterns in plants using genomic tiling microarrays. Nat
Methods 2: 213218
1581
Cheng et al.