Skip to main content
. 2017 Jan 9;18(3):464–476. doi: 10.15252/embr.201643051

Figure 2. JA represses PAD4 expression through MYC transcription factors.

Figure 2

  • A
    RT–qPCR analysis of PAD4 expression in leaves infiltrated with water (mock) or 1 μM flg22 at 9 hpi. Bars represent means and standard errors of the log2 expression level relative to Actin2 calculated from four independent experiments using a mixed linear model.
  • B
    PAD4 promoter showing the G box motif located 114 bp upstream of the transcription start site. Bold gray horizontal lines show the regions amplified by different qPCR primers.
  • C, D
    ChIP‐qPCR analysis of MYC2 binding to the PAD4 promoter. MYC2‐GFP seedlings were treated with 1 μM flg22 for the indicated time periods (C) or 100 μM MeJA for 3 h (D). Bars represent means and standard errors of the fold enrichment relative to the wild‐type plants set to 1, calculated from two independent experiments.
Data information: In (A), the Benjamini–Hochberg method was used to adjust P‐values (two‐tailed t‐tests) for correcting multiple hypothesis testing and statistically significant differences are indicated by different letters (adjusted P‐value < 0.05).