Phylogenetic evolution of the FT/TFL1 -like genes in basal eudicots
Previous phylogenetic analyses indicated that the PEBP gene family undergone two ancient duplications that generated three clades: MFT-like, FT-like and TFL1-like (Karlgren et al. 2011; Liu et al. 2016b). The first duplication giving rise to the MFT-like and FT/TFL1-like clades was suggested to take place in the common ancestor of seed plants or even earlier; the second duplication happened before the divergence of seed plants, resulting in the FT-like and TFL1-like clades (Liu et al. 2016b). After the separation of gymnosperms and angiosperms, further duplications occurred in each group. In angiosperms, an early whole-genome duplication (WGD) event has produced duplicate genes in each clade, and so most angiosperms contain approximately a half-dozen PEBP genes (Table S2). According to the evolutionary history of FT/TFL1 gene family, basal eudicots like P. acerifolia should possess MFT-like, FT-like and TFL1-like homologues. Previously, our research group have identified two Platanus FT-like genes PaFT and PaFTL that exhibited the function of promoting flowering in transgenic Arabidopsis or tobacco plants (Zhang et al. 2011; Cai et al. 2019). In order to comprehensively understand the evolution and functions of the FT/TFL1 gene family in Platanus, we isolated here another three genes of the family. Sequence alignment and phylogenetic analysis indicated that the three genes belong to TFL1-like clade (Fig. 1; Fig. 2).
In accordance with previous studies, our phylogenetic tree divided the PEBP proteins from 13 species (including gymnosperm, basal angiosperm, monocot, basal eudicots, and core eudicots) into MFT-like, FT-like, and TFL1-like groups. MFT-like clade was further separated into two subgroups, and two or more genes are present in most species except Aquilegia coerulea, Arabidopsis, Fragaria vesca and Populus nigra that may have lost one copy (Fig. 2). In Platanus, two MFT-like genes were speculated, which was supported by the transcriptome data wherein two distinct MFT-like transcripts were found (data not shown). TFL1-like clade was also grouped into two classes, BFT-like and TFL1-like, both of which consist of genes from all included basal angiosperm, basal eudicots, and core eudicots (Fig. 2), indicating that the duplication generating these two lineages should occur in the common ancestor of angiosperms. The members from rice are present only in TFL1-like other than BFT-like lineage, suggesting that monocots may have lost the BFT-like genes. Furthermore, the phylogenetic tree shows that the genes from core eudicots in the TFL1-like lineage form two subgroups, ATC-like and TFL1-like (Fig. 2), indicating that TFL1-like clade experienced another duplication during the evolution of core eudicots. Whereas, some species like Populus and Jatropha have lost the TFL1-like genes.
In basal eudicots, Nelumbo nucifera and Platanus belong to the same order, Proteales (Byng et al., 2016). In contrast to 7 PEBP members in Platanus (two MFT-like, three TFL1-like, and two FT-like), N. nucifera contains more FT/TFL1 genes, including four MFT-like, four FT-like and four TFL1-like genes (Fig. 2), which should be resulted from a recent whole-genome duplication in N. nucifera (Ming et al. 2013; Wang et al. 2013). Another species of the basal eudicot, A. coerulea, contains one MFT-like, three TFL1-like, and three FT-like genes, indicating it has lost one MFT-like member and experienced further duplication of the TFL1-like and FT-like genes.
Divergent expression and function of the TFL1 -like genes in P. acerifolia
In general, gene expression pattern has significant relationship with their functions. The expression patterns of TFL1-like genes show obviously changes among different members and/or plant species, and their functions also exhibit significant divergence and diversity (Wickland and Hanzawa 2015). For instance, Arabidopsis TFL1 transcripts are present in vegetative and inflorescence meristems to repress flowering and maintain inflorescence indeterminacy (Bradley et al. 1997; Serrano-Mislata et al. 2016), its paralog BFT is expressed in the shoot apical meristem, young leaf, and axillary inflorescence meristem (Yoo et al. 2010), whereas another paralog ATC was only detected in the hypocotyl of young plants, and not in the inflorescence meristem (Mimida et al. 2001). Apple TFL1-like genes MdTFL1 and MdTFL1a are expressed in the vegetative tissues in both the adult and juvenile phases; MdCENa (ATC ortholog) is mainly expressed in fruit receptacles, cultured tissues, and roots, while MdCENb is silenced in most organs (Mimida et al. 2009). The three TFL1-like genes in Jatropha curcas also show distinct expression patterns: JcTFL1a and JcTFL1c are mainly expressed in the roots of juvenile plants, whereas JcTFL1b transcripts are abundantly accumulated in the fruits and stems (Li et al. 2015; Li et al. 2017).
Like most TFL1-like genes in other species, the three TFL1-like genes of London plane are preferentially expressed in vegetative tissues, but they have distinct spatiotemporal expression patterns. PlacTFL1a was widely expressed in vegetative organs of both juvenile and adult plants, including stems, leaves, apical buds, VBs, and the vegetative tissues of MBs (Fig. 3; Fig. 4). The expression of PlacTFL1a in SBs increased gradually prior to the inflorescence initiation (from April to May), but dramatically decreased during the inflorescence differentiation period (June), suggesting that PlacTFL1a play a crucial role in maintaining the vegetative growth and repressing the reproductive development of London plane, which is further supported by the highest expression level of PlacTFL1a in the VBs at July when the inflorescences are developing (Fig. 4). Based on this hypothesis, we speculate that higher expression level of PlacTFL1a should be present in the VBs at June, but at that moment the subpetiolar buds maintaining vegetative status could not be distinguished visibly from those undergoing flower bud differentiation, and so not detected. It is interesting that the expression levels of PlacTFL1b is significantly lower than PlacTFL1a and only weak expression is detected in a few tissues (Fig. 3; Fig. 4), although they are very closely related in terms of the coding sequences, with the identity of 91.7% at nucleotide level. In general, functional evolution of genes depends on two aspects: the change of gene coding sequences and alteration of gene expression patterns. Overexpression of PlacTFL1a and PlacTFL1b in Arabidopsis resulted in comparable phenotypic changes (Fig. 5), indicating that PlacTFL1b has retained its function in point of protein sequence but may has lost most functions in London plane due to expression degeneration after duplication, similar to above-mentioned apple MdCENb (Mimida et al. 2009). Expression pattern of PlacBFT is also significantly different from that of PlacTFL1a, with predominant expression in stems and roots, and weak in growing SBs (Fig. 3), suggesting PlacBFT may have undergone subfunctionalization during evolution.
Unlike some TFL1-like genes that are strongly expressed in developing inflorescences, such as Arabidopsis TFL1 (Bradley et al. 1997), Antirrhinum CEN (Bradley et al. 1996), and HvTFL1s in rubber tree (Bi et al. 2019b), no TFL1-like genes of London plane were expressed evidently in inflorescences with various developmental stages (Fig. 3; Fig. S2). Given that the expression of TFL1-like genes in the inflorescences is related to their functions in the control of inflorescence architecture (Bradley et al. 1996; Bradley et al. 1997; Nakagawa et al. 2002; Fernandez et al. 2010; Perilleux et al. 2019), we speculate that the TFL1-like genes of London plane may not involve in inflorescence development. To verify their functions, the three TFL1-like genes of Platanus were further investigated by transgenic studies in Arabidopsis and petunia. Overexpression of each gene delayed or repressed flowering, increased the number of leaves and nodes in transgenic plants compared to their wild-type counterparts, as reported in other species that constitutively express TFL1-like genes, confirming their highly functional conversation in flowering regulation among different plant species.
Potential mechanism of PlacTFL1a function
In model plants, TFL1 functions via directly repressing flowering-related genes, such as AP1, FUL, and LFY (Bradley et al. 1997; Ratcliffe et al. 1999; Hanano and Goto 2011). In contrast to PlacTFL1a, the expression of London plane AP1 homologs (FUL-like genes, PlacFLs) increased in SBs at the stage of inflorescence initiation (June) and maintained their expression level during the inflorescence developing process (Zhang et al. 2019), suggesting that PlacTFL1a inhibits reproductive development and flowering probably through repressing the expression of FUL-like genes in Platanus, which is consistent with the results reported in pear in which the expression of TFL1-like genes (PpTFL1-1a and PpTFL1-2a) rapidly decrease in reproductive meristems followed by upregulation of PpAP1 and PpFUL genes (Bai et al. 2017). Furthermore, significant downregulation of PFG, FBP26, and FBP29 genes were detected in 35:PlacTFL1a transgenic petunia plants that displayed the phenotype of severely repressed flowering (Fig. 8). It has been reported previously that knockdown of PFG and FBP26 genes (two FUL orthologs) represses the transition from vegetative to reproductive development in petunia, resulting in a phenotype exactly similar to the 35:PlacTFL1a transgenic plant #23 in our study (Immink et al. 1999), which indicates that 35:PlacTFL1a represses flowering at least partially through regulating the expression of AP/FUL-like genes in petunia. All these results support a probably conserved regulatory mechanism between TFL1 and AP1/FUL-like genes in flowering regulation. However, our transgenic individual #6 showed drastically non-flowering phenotype even after several generations of propagation by cutting lasting for approximate two years, which is much more late-flowering than the PFG and FBP26 downregulated plants, even than a quadruple mutant of all the petunia AP1/FUL-like genes, pfg fbp26 fbp29 euap1 (Morel et al. 2019), suggesting that 35:PlacTFL1a must have regulated other flowering-related genes besides the AP1/FUL-like genes. Indeed, we found a FT-like gene (PhFT) was significantly upregulated in the leaves of 35S:PlacTFL1a transgenic line #6 (Fig. 8). However, FT and its orthologs in most plant species were proved to function as florigens that promote flowering (Wickland and Hanzawa 2015). Interestingly, our recent study indicated that PhFT (corresponding to PhFT1 therein) might function as a repressor of flowering in petunia, because its overexpression in Arabidopsis resulted in significantly late flowering (Wu et al. 2019). The functions of repressing flowering have also been reported for several FT-like genes in other species, such as BvFT1 in sugar beet (Pin et al. 2010), HaFT1 in sunflower (Blackman et al. 2010), NtFT1/2/3 in tobacco (Harig et al. 2012), and SlSP5G(2/3) in tomato (Cao et al. 2015). In summary, PlacTFL1a represses flowering in petunia might through activating the flowering repressor PhFT1 and inhibiting the flowering promotors AP1/FUL-like genes, and some other unknown regulators if any.
It is well known that FT/TSF proteins are produced in leaf and then transmitted to shoot apical meristem where they induce the formation of floral meristem through interacting with FD to activate the expression of downstream genes SOC1 and AP1 (Yamaguchi et al. 2005). TFL1 repress flowering probably via interacting with FD to compete with FT (Hanano and Goto 2011; Ho and Weigel 2014; Zhu et al. 2020). Besides Arabidopsis, TFL1-like proteins interacting with FD homologues have been identified in Rosa chinensis, kiwifruit and so on (Varkonyi-Gasic et al. 2013; Randoux et al. 2014; Kaneko-Suzuki et al. 2018). To confirm the conversation of this regulatory mechanism, interactions between London plane TFL1-like proteins and FD homologue (PlacFDL) were investigated by yeast two-hybrid analysis. The results demonstrated that only PlacTFL1a has weak interaction with PlacFDL, while both PlacTFL1b and PlacBFT have no interaction with PlacFDL (Fig. 9). Even so, ectopic expression of both PlacTFL1b and PlacBFT in Arabidopsis still can delay flowering. Two hypotheses could be used to explain this result: one possibility is that PlacTFL1b and PlacBFT are able to interact with other FD-like members in London plane, as well as Arabidopsis FD protein; alternatively, interaction between Platanus TFL1-like protein and FD-like protein is not necessary for its function in repressing flowering. The latter assumption is supported by the fact that overexpression of PlacTFL1a in petunia results in repressed flowering, but no interaction between PlacTFL1a as well as PlacTFL1b and petunia FD-like proteins (PhFDL1 and PhFDL2) was detected (Fig. 9), while PlacBFT does interact with one of the petunia FD-like protein PhFDL1. A recent genome-wide ChIP-seq analysis demonstrated that TFL1 may interact with other DNA-binding proteins, besides FD, to regulate the expression of downstream genes (Goretti et al. 2020). In summary, our results confirmed the function of Platanus TFL1-like genes in repressing flowering, but probably via a distinct regulatory mechanism.