Skip to main content
. 2009 Mar 27;106(15):6416–6421. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0813038106

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3.

Analysis of branching in 35S∷PAM765 (tengu) transgenic plants and phytoplasma-infected plants. (A) A 35S∷GUS transgenic plant (control). (B–E) Phenotypes of the 35S∷PAM765 transgenic A. thaliana lines. (B–D) The 35S∷PAM765 transgenic plants exhibited defects in phyllotaxis (2 or more flowers growing from a single point on the stem). (E) A 35S∷PAM765 transgenic plant with sterile flowers. (F) An uninfected plant (control). (G–I) Phenotypes of the OY-infected plants. (G and H) The OY-infected plants exhibited defects in phyllotaxis, similar to (B–D). (I) An OY-infected plant with sterile flowers, as in (E). (Scale bars, 50 mm.) (J) The transcription of tengu was examined by quantitative real-time RT-PCR and the results were normalized against the expression of tufB. The error bars indicate the SD. An asterisk indicates a significant difference (P < 0.05). 1, Phytoplasma-infected plants (C. coronarium). 2, Phytoplasma-infected insects (M. striifrons).