terclim by ICS banner
IVES 9 IVES Conference Series 9 VviSOC1a and VviAG1 act antagonistically in the regulation of flower formation

VviSOC1a and VviAG1 act antagonistically in the regulation of flower formation

Abstract

The SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION OF CONSTANS1 (SOC1) is a key floral activator that coordinates external and internal stimuli to ensure timely flowering. During early stages of flower formation, SOC1 represses floral organ identity genes such as AGAMOUS (AG) to prevent premature organ differentiation. In addition to floral organ specification, AG has been shown to regulate fleshy fruit expansion and ripening and, as such, is an important contributor to fruit quality traits. Currently, little is known about the function and gene regulatory network of the grapevine homologs VviSOC1a and VviAG1. As such, the aim of this study was to functionally characterise both genes by overexpressing them in tomato and performing phenotypic and gene expression studies. A dual luciferase (DL) assay involving putative target gene promoters was also conducted. Overexpression of VviSOC1a led to the development of leaf-like sepals, petals with increased chlorophyll content and plant sterility phenotypes. VviAG1-OE lines displayed hastened floral initiation, stamenoid petals, dwarfed fruit, as well as forming fleshy fruit sepals which gave the appearance of ripened pericarp tissue. The observed floral phenotypes were, in part, supported by the modulation of genes required for floral organ specification in tomato. VviSOC1a and VviAG1 displayed opposite expression trends, while also repressing each other’s expression in the DL assay. Collectively, the findings of this study supported a role for VviSOC1a in regulating floral organ specification, through the repression of the stamen and carpel identity gene VviAG1. An additional function for VviAG1 in berry development and ripening is also suggested.

DOI:

Publication date: June 13, 2024

Issue: Open GPB 2024

Type: Poster

Authors

Jenna Jolliffe1,2, Claudio Moser2, Stefania Pilati2 and Justin Lashbrooke3*

1South African Grape and Wine Research Institute, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, 7600, South Africa
2Research and Innovation Centre, Edmund Mach Foundation, San Michele all’Adige, 38098, Italy
3Department of Genetics, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, 7600, South Africa

Contact the author*

Keywords

SOC1, AG1, Flower, transcription factor, development

Tags

IVES Conference Series | Open GPB | Open GPB 2024

Citation

Related articles…

Proteomic profiling of grape berry presenting early loss of mesocarp cell vitality

From fruit set to ripening, the grape berry mesocarp experiences a wide range of dynamic physical, physiological, and biochemical changes, such as mesocarp cell death (MCD) and hydraulic isolation. The premature occurrence of such events is a characteristic of the Niagara Rosada (NR) variety, utilised as table grapes and winemaking. In our opinion, the onset of ripening would not cause MCD, but a down-regulation of respiratory enzymes during the early loss of cell viability, while maintaining membrane integrity. For this, we investigated three distinct developmental stages (green (E-L33), veraison (E-L35), and ripe (E-L39)) of NR berries by label-free proteomics, enzymatic respiratory activity and outer mesocarp imaging. Cell wall-modifying proteins were found to accumulate differently throughout ripening, while cytoplasmic membranes continue intact.

Stability of 3-mercaptohexanol during white wine storage in relationship to must pre-fermentative fining

3-Mercaptohexanol (3MH) is a volatile thiol occurring in several white and red wines, where it can contribute to fruity attributes. Its content is typically high in wines from certain grape varieties, in particular Sauvignon blanc, where it is considered a varietal marker. The strong nucleophilic character of thiols makes 3MH rather unstable during wine storage, due to the presence of several strong electrophilic species. Among these electrophilics, those arising from the oxidation of flavan3-ols such as catechin and epi-catechin have been indicated as critical for 3MH stability. Accordingly, there is a generalized interest towards the ability of vinification practices to reduce 3MH loss during aging through the management of wine flavan-3-ols content.

Flavanol glycosides in grapes and wines : the key missing molecular intermediates in condensed tannin biosynthesis ?

Polyphenols are present in a wide variety of plants and foods such as tea, cacao and grape1. An important sub-class of these compounds is the flavanols present in grapes and wines as monomers (e.g (+)-catechin or (-)-epicatechin), or polymers also called condensed tannins or proanthocyanidins. They have important antioxidant properties2 but their biosynthesis remains partly unknown. Some recent studies have focused on the role of glycosylated intermediates that are involved in the transport of the monomers and may serve as precursors in the polymerization mechanism3, 4. The global objective of this work is to identify flavanol glycosides in grapes or wines, describe their structure and determine their abundance during grape development and in wine.

SHIRAZ FLAVONOID EXTRACTABILITY IMPACTED BY HIGH AND EXTREME HIGH TEMPERATURES

Climate change is leading to an increase in average temperature and in the severity and occurrence of heatwaves, and is already disrupting grapevine phenology. In Australia, with the evolution of the weather of grape growing regions that are already warm and hot, berry composition including flavonoids, for which biosynthesis depends on bunch microclimate, are expected to be impacted [1]. These compounds, such as anthocyanins and tannins, contribute substantially to grape and wine quality. The goal of this research was to determine how flavonoid extraction is impacted when bunches are exposed to high (>35 °C) and extreme high (>45 °C) temperatures during berry development and maturity.

Vine environment interaction as a method for land viticultural evaluation. An experience in Friuli Venezia Giulia (N-E of Italy)

For a long time environment was known as one of the most important factors to characterize the quality of wines but at the same time it appears very difficult to distinguish inside the “terroir” the role of the single factor. These remarks partially explain why methods for viticultural evaluation are often quite different (Amerine et al., 1944; Antoniazzi et al., 1986; Asselin et al., 1987; Astruc et al., 1980; Bonfils, 1977; Boselli, 1991; Colugnati, 1990; Costantinescu, 1967; Costantini et al., 1987; Dutt et al., 1981; Falcetti et al., 1992; Fregoni et al., 1992; Hidalgo, 1980; Intrieri et al., 1988; Laville, 1990; Morlat et al., 1991; Scienza et al., 1990; Shubert et al., 1987; Turri et al., 1991).