ArticlePlant physiology2024
Functional divergence of Arabidopsis REPRESSOR OF UV-B PHOTOMORPHOGENESIS 1 and 2 in repression of flowering.
Article in Plant physiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- UV-B Irradiation Does Not Promote Flowering inPlant direct · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Photoperiodic plants coordinate the timing of flowering with seasonal light cues, thereby optimizing their sexual reproductive success. The WD40-repeat protein REPRESSOR OF UV-B PHOTOMORPHOGENESIS 2 (RUP2) functions as a potent repressor of UV RESISTANCE LOCUS 8 (UVR8) photoreceptor-mediated UV-B induction of flowering under noninductive, short-day conditions in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana); however, in contrast, the closely related RUP1 seems to play no major role. Here, analysis of chimeric ProRUP1:RUP2 and ProRUP2:RUP1 expression lines suggested that the distinct functions of RUP1 and RUP2 in repressing flowering are due to differences in both their coding and regulatory DNA sequences. Artificial altered expression using tissue-specific promoters indicated that RUP2 functions in repressing flowering when expressed in mesophyll and phloem companion cells, whereas RUP1 functions only when expressed in phloem companion cells. Endogenous RUP1 expression in vascular tissue was quantified as lower than that of RUP2, likely underlying the functional difference between RUP1 and RUP2 in repressing flowering. Taken together, our findings highlight the importance of phloem vasculature expression of RUP2 in repressing flowering under short days and identify a basis for the functional divergence of Arabidopsis RUP1 and RUP2 in regulating flowering time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.