title: A comparison study of Agrobacterium-mediated transformation methods for root-specific promoter analysis in soybean.
abstract: Both in vitro and in vivo hairy root transformation systems could not replace whole plant transformation for promoter analysis of root-specific and low-P induced genes in soybean. An efficient genetic transformation system is crucial for promoter analysis in plants. Agrobacterium-mediated transformation is the most popular method to produce transgenic hairy roots or plants. In the present study, first, we compared the two different Agrobacterium rhizogenes-mediated hairy root transformation methods using either constitutive CaMV35S or the promoters of root-preferential genes, GmEXPB2 and GmPAP21, in soybean, and found the efficiency of in vitro hairy root transformation was significantly higher than that of in vivo transformation. We compared Agrobacterium rhizogenes-mediated hairy root and Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated whole plant transformation systems. The results showed that low-phosphorous (P) inducible GmEXPB2 and GmPAP21 promoters could not induce the increased expression of the GUS reporter gene under low P stress in both in vivo and in vitro transgenic hairy roots. Conversely, GUS activity of GmPAP21 promoter was significantly higher at low P than high P in whole plant transformation. Therefore, both in vitro and in vivo hairy root transformation systems could not replace whole plant transformation for promoter analysis of root-specific and low-P induced genes in soybean.
authors.affiliation: State Key Laboratory for Conservation and Utilization of Subtropical Agro-bioresources, Root Biology Center, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou, 510642, China.
authors.forename: Caifeng
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Li
authors.forename: Haiyan
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Zhang
authors.forename: Xiurong
authors.initials: X
authors.lastname: Wang
authors.forename: Hong
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Liao
mesh_terms: D060054:Agrobacterium / Q000235:genetics*; D016960:Agrobacterium tumefaciens / Q000235:genetics; D017796:Caulimovirus / Q000235:genetics; D035264:Flowers / Q000235:genetics / Q000378:metabolism; D015971:Gene Expression Regulation, Enzymologic / Q000187:drug effects; D005966:Glucuronidase / Q000235:genetics / Q000378:metabolism; D006651:Histocytochemistry; D010758:Phosphorus / Q000378:metabolism / Q000494:pharmacology; D018515:Plant Leaves / Q000235:genetics / Q000378:metabolism; D018517:Plant Roots / Q000235:genetics* / Q000378:metabolism; D018547:Plant Stems / Q000235:genetics / Q000378:metabolism; D030821:Plants, Genetically Modified; D011401:Promoter Regions, Genetic / Q000235:genetics*; D020133:Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction; D030262:Soybean Proteins / Q000235:genetics; D013025:Glycine max / Q000235:genetics* / Q000378:metabolism; D014170:Transformation, Genetic
chemical_list: D030262:Soybean Proteins; D010758:Phosphorus; D005966:Glucuronidase
references.citation: Plant Cell Rep. 2010 Feb;29(2):113-23
references.pmid: 20012965
references.citation: PLoS One. 2012;7(10):e47726
references.pmid: 23133521
references.citation: Plant J. 2005 Dec;44(5):840-53
references.pmid: 16297074
references.citation: Biotechnol Adv. 2009 Nov-Dec;27(6):753-763
references.pmid: 19508888
references.citation: Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 2006 Dec;19(12):1385-93
references.pmid: 17153923
references.citation: Plant Physiol. 2012 Aug;159(4):1634-43
references.pmid: 22740613
references.citation: Plant J. 2011 May;66(3):541-52
references.pmid: 21261763
references.citation: Biotechnol Adv. 2000 Mar;18(1):1-22
references.pmid: 14538116
references.citation: Plant Mol Biol. 2002 Oct;50(3):463-74
references.pmid: 12369622
references.citation: Physiol Plant. 2014 Feb;150(2):194-204
references.pmid: 23773128
references.citation: Nat Protoc. 2007;2(7):1819-24
references.pmid: 17641650
references.citation: Plant Physiol. 2011 Jul;156(3):1025-32
references.pmid: 21464472
references.citation: Biotechniques. 1994 Apr;16(4):664-8, 670
references.pmid: 8024787
references.citation: J Virol. 1990 Apr;64(4):1590-7
references.pmid: 2319646
references.citation: Ann Bot. 2012 Jan;109(1):275-85
references.pmid: 21948626
references.citation: Mol Gen Genet. 1989 Jan;215(2):337-44
references.pmid: 2651885
references.citation: EMBO J. 1991 Oct;10(10):2889-95
references.pmid: 1915268
references.citation: Plant J. 2005 Aug;43(3):449-57
references.pmid: 16045479
references.citation: Plant Mol Biol. 1999 Feb;39(3):551-64
references.pmid: 10092182
references.citation: Planta. 2000 Jan;210(2):195-204
references.pmid: 10664125
references.citation: Biotechnol Lett. 2010 Oct;32(10):1533-9
references.pmid: 20495947
references.citation: Mol Plant Microbe Interact. 2001 Jun;14(6):695-700
references.pmid: 11386364
references.citation: Plant Physiol. 2009 Sep;151(1):233-40
references.pmid: 19587103
references.citation: Plant Physiol. 1988 Jun;87(2):479-83
references.pmid: 16666168
references.citation: Nat Protoc. 2007;2(4):948-52
references.pmid: 17446894