Table 1.
Summary of promoters tested in this study
| Promoter name | Leaf | Root | Cereal | Category |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| pBdEF1α | HIGH | HIGH | HIGH | 1 |
| p35S | HIGH | HIGH | MED | 1 |
| pAtUBI10 | HIGH | HIGH | MED | 1 |
| pOsUBI3 | HIGH | HIGH | MED | 1 |
| pZmUBI | MED | HIGH | HIGH | 1 |
| pBdUBI10 | MED | MED | HIGH | 1 |
| pOsPGD1 | MED | MED | MED | 1 |
| pOsR1G1B | HIGH | HIGH | LOW | 2 |
| pMtCCaMK | HIGH | HIGH | LOW | 2 |
| pLjCCaMK | HIGH | HIGH | LOW | 2 |
| pOsCCaMK | HIGH | HIGH | LOW | 2 |
| pSiCCaMK | HIGH | HIGH | LOW | 2 |
| pMtPT2 | HIGH | HIGH | LOW | 2 |
| pOsAPX | HIGH | MED | LOW | 2 |
| pZmPIP2.1 | HIGH | MED | LOW | 2 |
| pAtPyk10 | HIGH | MED | LOW | 2 |
| pSlREO | HIGH | MED | LOW | 2 |
| pMtNSP2 | HIGH | – | LOW | 2 |
| pFaRB7 | MED | HIGH | LOW | 2 |
| pTobRB7 | MED | HIGH | LOW | 2 |
| pSbCCaMK | MED | HIGH | LOW | 2 |
| pOsCc1 | MED | HIGH | LOW | 2 |
| pZmTUB1α | MED | MED | LOW | 2 |
| pMtPT1 | MED | MED | LOW | 2 |
| pIbSRD1 | MED | MED | LOW | 2 |
| pZmRsyn7 | MED | MED | LOW | 2 |
| pOsRS1 | MED | MED | LOW | 2 |
| pPvUBI2 | LOW | LOW | HIGH | 3 |
| pPvUBI1 | LOW | LOW | HIGH | 3 |
| pOsAct1 | LOW | LOW | MED | 3 |
| pOsRS2 | LOW | MED | MED | 4 |
| pOsSCP1 | LOW | MED | LOW | 5 |
| pMtIPD3 | LOW | MED | LOW | 5 |
| pZmCCaMK | LOW | MED | LOW | 5 |
| pOsCYCLOPS | LOW | MED | LOW | 5 |
| pHvIDS2 | LOW | MED | LOW | 5 |
| pHvPht1.1 | LOW | MED | LOW | 5 |
| pOsRCc3 | LOW | MED | LOW | 5 |
| pZmEF1α | MED | LOW | LOW | 6 |
| pBdCCaMK | MED | LOW | LOW | 6 |
| pMtERN2 | MED | – | LOW | 6 |
| pZmTUB2α | LOW | LOW | LOW | 7 |
| pOsEIF5 | LOW | LOW | LOW | 7 |
| pSiCYCLOPS | LOW | LOW | LOW | 7 |
| pMtNSP1 | LOW | – | LOW | 7 |
| pHvPht1.2 | – | LOW | LOW | 7 |
Promoter activity was scored according to results from Nicotiana benthamiana leaves (leaf), Medicago truncatula and Lotus japonicus roots (root) and Hordeum vulgare roots (cereal). High (green), medium (amber) or low (red) scoring is based on promoter activity being ranked either in the top, middle or bottom third of all tested promoters. The assigned categories are as follows: 1, good for leaves and roots in both monocotyledonous and dicotyledonous species; 2, good for leaves and roots in dicotyledonous species, but not best for cereal roots; 3, better for cereal roots than roots or leaves from dicotyledonous species; 4, generally better for roots, but not ideal for leaves; 5, better for roots of dicotyledonous species, but not ideal for leaves or cereal roots; 6, better for leaves of dicotyledonous species, but not ideal for roots; 7, least good promoters. Hyphen denotes untested experimental condition. Also see File S2 for a full summary of all of the characterization data presented in this work.