Figure 5.

Morphological Phenotypes of the Loss- and Gain-of-Function ERF6 Transgenic Plants Are Not Associated with Constitutive PR1 Expression, ROS Generation, or Alteration in Ethylene Signaling/Production.

(A) Expression of the phospho-mimicking ERF6^4D and dominant-negative ERF6-EAR confer opposite morphological phenotypes. Images of 35S:ERF6^WT, 35S:ERF6^4D, and 35S:ERF6-EAR, along with Col-0 control plants grown under short-day conditions, were taken at 7 weeks.

(B) PR1 gene expression in Col-0, 35S:ERF6^WT, 35S:ERF6^4D, and 35S:ERF6-EAR plants was quantified by real-time qPCR. PR1 transcript levels were calculated as percentages of the EF1α transcript. Error bars indicate sd (n = 3).

(C) ROS accumulation in Col-0, 35S:ERF6^WT, 35S:ERF6^4D, and 35S:ERF6-EAR plants was detected by DAB staining.

(D) Normal triple responses of etiolated 35S:ERF6^WT, 35S:ERF6^4D, and 35S:ERF6-EAR seedlings. ACC, 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylic acid.

(E) Normal basal level production of ethylene in 35S:ERF6^WT, 35S:ERF6^4D, and 35S:ERF6-EAR seedlings. FW, fresh weight.

[See online article for color version of this figure.]