Functional conservation of MADS-box factors controlling floral organ identity in rice and Arabidopsis

Studies on MADS-box genes in Arabidopsis and other higher eudicotyledonous flowering plants have shown that they are key regulators of flower development. Since Arabidopsis and monocotyledonous rice are distantly related plant species it is interesting to investigate whether the floral organ identity factors have been conserved in their functions, and if not, to understand the differences. Arabidopsis and rice are very suitable for these studies since they are both regarded as models for plant functional genomics. Both their genomes are sequenced and tools are available for the analysis of gene function. These developments have accelerated experiments and increased our knowledge on rice gene function. Therefore it is the right moment to perform a comparative analysis on MADS-box factors controlling floral organ identity as reported in this review

Molecular control of carpel development in the grass family

Carpel is the ovule-bearing female reproductive organ of flowering plants and is required to ensure its protection, an efficient fertilization, and the development of diversified types of fruits, thereby it is a vital element of most food crops. The origin and morphological changes of the carpel are key to the evolution and adaption of angiosperms. Progresses have been made in elucidating the developmental mechanisms of carpel establishment in the model eudicot plant Arabidopsis thaliana, while little and fragmentary information is known in grasses, a family that includes many important crops such as rice (Oryza sativa), maize (Zea mays), barley (Hordeum vulgare), and wheat (Triticum aestivum). Here, we highlight recent advances in understanding the mechanisms underlying potential pathways of carpel development in grasses, including carpel identity determination, morphogenesis, and floral meristem determinacy. The known role of transcription factors, hormones, and miRNAs during grass carpel formation is summarized and compared with the extensively studied eudicot model plant Arabidopsis. The genetic and molecular aspects of carpel development that are conserved or diverged between grasses and eudicots are therefore discussed.Chaoqun Shen, Gang Li, Ludovico Dreni and Dabing Zhan

Interactions between FLORAL ORGAN NUMBER₄ and floral homeotic genes in regulating rice flower development

The floral meristem (FM) is self-maintaining at the early stages of flower development, but it is terminated when a fixed number of floral organs are produced. The FLORAL ORGAN NUMBER4 (FON4; also known as FON2) gene, an ortholog of Arabidopsis CLAVATA3 (CLV3), is required for regulating FM size and determinacy in rice. However, its interactions with floral homeotic genes remain unknown. Here, we report the genetic interactions between FON4 and floral homeotic genes OsMADS15 (an A-class gene), OsMADS16 (also called SUPERWOMAN1, SPW1, a B-class gene), OsMADS3 and OsMADS58 (C-class genes), OsMADS13 (a D-class gene), and OsMADS1 (an E-class gene) during flower development. We observed an additive phenotype in the fon4 double mutant with the OsMADS15 mutant allele dep (degenerative palea). The effect on the organ number of whorl 2 was enhanced in fon4 spw1. Double mutant combinations of fon4 with osmads3, osmads58, osmads13, and osmads1 displayed enhanced defects in FM determinacy and identity, respectively, indicating that FON4 and these genes synergistically control FM activity. In addition, the expression patterns of all the genes besides OsMADS13 had no obvious change in the fon4 mutant. This work reveals how the meristem maintenance gene FON4 genetically interacts with C, D, and E floral homeotic genes in specifying FM activity in monocot rice.Wei Xu, Juhong Tao, Mingjiao Chen, Ludovico Dreni, Zhijing Luo, Yun Hu, Wanqi Liang and Dabing Zhan

ERAMOSA controls lateral branching in snapdragon

Plant forms display a wide variety of architectures, depending on the number of lateral branches, internode elongation and phyllotaxy. These are in turn determined by the number, the position and the fate of the Axillary Meristems (AMs). Mutants that affect AM determination during the vegetative phase have been isolated in several model plants. Among these genes, the GRAS transcription factor LATERAL SUPPRESSOR (Ls) plays a pivotal role in AM determination during the vegetative phase. Hereby we characterize the phylogenetic orthologue of Ls in Antirrhinum, ERAMOSA (ERA). Our data supported ERA control of AM formation during both the vegetative and the reproductive phase in snapdragon. A phylogenetic analysis combined with an analysis of the synteny of Ls in several species strongly supported the hypothesis that ERA is a phylogenetic orthologue of Ls, although it plays a broader role. During the reproductive phase ERA promotes the establishment of the stem niche at the bract axis but, after the reproductive transition, it is antagonized by the MADS box transcription factor SQUAMOSA (SQUA). Surprisingly double mutant era squa plants display a squa phenotype developing axillary meristems, which can eventually turn into inflorescences or flowers

Rice MADS6 interacts with the floral homeotic genes SUPERWOMAN1, MADS3, MADS58, MADS13, and DROOPING LEAF in specifying floral organ identities and meristem fate

AGAMOUS-LIKE6 (AGL6) genes play essential roles in flower development, but whether and how they work with floral organ identity genes remain less understood. Here, we describe interactions of the rice (Oryza sativa) AGL6 gene MADS6 with other rice floral homeotic genes in flower development. Genetic analyses revealed that MADS6 specifies the identity of the three inner whorls and floral meristem determinacy redundantly with SUPERWOMAN1/MADS16 (B-gene) or MADS3 (C-gene). MADS6 was shown to define carpel/ovule development and floral determinacy by interacting with MADS13 (D-gene) and control the palea and floral meristem identities together with the YABBY gene DROOPING LEAF. Expression analyses revealed that the transcript levels of six B-, C-, and E-class genes were reduced in mads6-1 at the early flower developmental stage, suggesting that MADS6 is a key regulator of early flower development. Moreover, MADS6 can directly bind to a putative regulatory motif on MADS58 (C-gene), and mads6-1 mads58 displayed phenotypes similar to that of mads6-1. These results suggest that MADS6 is a key player in specifying flower development via interacting with other floral homeotic genes in rice, thus providing new insights into the mechanism by which flower development is controlled.Haifeng Li, Wanqi Liang, Yun Hu, Lu Zhu, Changsong Yin, Jie Xu, Ludovico Dreni, Martin M. Kater, and Dabing Zhan

Two euAGAMOUS genes control C-function in Medicago truncatula

[EN] C-function MADS-box transcription factors belong to the AGAMOUS (AG) lineage and specify both stamen and carpel identity and floral meristem determinacy. In core eudicots, the AG lineage is further divided into two branches, the euAG and PLE lineages. Functional analyses across flowering plants strongly support the idea that duplicated AG lineage genes have different degrees of subfunctionalization of the C-function. The legume Medicago truncatula contains three C-lineage genes in its genome: two euAG genes (MtAGa and MtAGb) and one PLENA-like gene (MtSHP). This species is therefore a good experimental system to study the effects of gene duplication within the AG subfamily. We have studied the respective functions of each euAG genes in M. truncatula employing expression analyses and reverse genetic approaches. Our results show that the M. truncatula euAG- and PLENA-like genes are an example of subfunctionalization as a result of a change in expression pattern. MtAGa and MtAGb are the only genes showing a full C-function activity, concomitant with their ancestral expression profile, early in the floral meristem, and in the third and fourth floral whorls during floral development. In contrast, MtSHP expression appears late during floral development suggesting it does not contribute significantly to the C-function. Furthermore, the redundant MtAGa and MtAGb paralogs have been retained which provides the overall dosage required to specify the C-function in M. truncatula.This work was funded by grants BIO2009-08134 and BIO2012-39849-C02-01 from the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness and the Ramon y Cajal Program (RYC-2007-00627 to CGM). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.Serwatowska, J.; Roque Mesa, EM.; Gómez Mena, MC.; Constantin, GD.; Wen, J.; Mysore, KS.; Lund, OS.... (2014). Two euAGAMOUS genes control C-function in Medicago truncatula. PLoS ONE. 9(8):103770-1-103770-12. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0103770S103770-1103770-1298Prunet, N., & Jack, T. P. (2013). Flower Development in Arabidopsis: There Is More to It Than Learning Your ABCs. Flower Development, 3-33. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-9408-9_1Causier, B., Schwarz-Sommer, Z., & Davies, B. (2010). Floral organ identity: 20 years of ABCs. Seminars in Cell & Developmental Biology, 21(1), 73-79. doi:10.1016/j.semcdb.2009.10.005Irish, V. F. (2010). The flowering of Arabidopsis flower development. The Plant Journal, 61(6), 1014-1028. doi:10.1111/j.1365-313x.2009.04065.xHeijmans, K., Morel, P., & Vandenbussche, M. (2012). MADS-box Genes and Floral Development: the Dark Side. Journal of Experimental Botany, 63(15), 5397-5404. doi:10.1093/jxb/ers233Bowman, J. L., Smyth, D. R., & Meyerowitz, E. M. (1989). Genes directing flower development in Arabidopsis. The Plant Cell, 1(1), 37-52. doi:10.1105/tpc.1.1.37Yanofsky, M. F., Ma, H., Bowman, J. L., Drews, G. N., Feldmann, K. A., & Meyerowitz, E. M. (1990). The protein encoded by the Arabidopsis homeotic gene agamous resembles transcription factors. Nature, 346(6279), 35-39. doi:10.1038/346035a0Bradley, D., Carpenter, R., Sommer, H., Hartley, N., & Coen, E. (1993). Complementary floral homeotic phenotypes result from opposite orientations of a transposon at the plena locus of antirrhinum. Cell, 72(1), 85-95. doi:10.1016/0092-8674(93)90052-rPinyopich, A., Ditta, G. S., Savidge, B., Liljegren, S. J., Baumann, E., Wisman, E., & Yanofsky, M. F. (2003). Assessing the redundancy of MADS-box genes during carpel and ovule development. Nature, 424(6944), 85-88. doi:10.1038/nature01741Liljegren, S. J., Ditta, G. S., Eshed, Y., Savidge, B., Bowman, J. L., & Yanofsky, M. F. (2000). SHATTERPROOF MADS-box genes control seed dispersal in Arabidopsis. Nature, 404(6779), 766-770. doi:10.1038/35008089Davies, B., Motte, P., Keck, E., Saedler, H., Sommer, H., & Schwarz-Sommer, Z. (1999). PLENA and FARINELLI: redundancy and regulatory interactions between two Antirrhinum MADS-box factors controlling flower development. The EMBO Journal, 18(14), 4023-4034. doi:10.1093/emboj/18.14.4023Kramer, E. M., Jaramillo, M. A., & Di Stilio, V. S. (2004). Patterns of Gene Duplication and Functional Evolution During the Diversification of the AGAMOUS Subfamily of MADS Box Genes in Angiosperms. Genetics, 166(2), 1011-1023. doi:10.1534/genetics.166.2.1011Becker, A. (2003). The major clades of MADS-box genes and their role in the development and evolution of flowering plants. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 29(3), 464-489. doi:10.1016/s1055-7903(03)00207-0Irish, V. F. (2003). The evolution of floral homeotic gene function. BioEssays, 25(7), 637-646. doi:10.1002/bies.10292Zahn, L. M., Leebens-Mack, J. H., Arrington, J. M., Hu, Y., Landherr, L. L., dePamphilis, C. W., … Ma, H. (2006). Conservation and divergence in the AGAMOUS subfamily of MADS-box genes: evidence of independent sub- and neofunctionalization events. Evolution Development, 8(1), 30-45. doi:10.1111/j.1525-142x.2006.05073.xFerrandiz, C. (2000). Negative Regulation of the SHATTERPROOF Genes by FRUITFULL During Arabidopsis Fruit Development. Science, 289(5478), 436-438. doi:10.1126/science.289.5478.436Ma, H., Yanofsky, M. F., & Meyerowitz, E. M. (1991). AGL1-AGL6, an Arabidopsis gene family with similarity to floral homeotic and transcription factor genes. Genes & Development, 5(3), 484-495. doi:10.1101/gad.5.3.484Savidge, B., Rounsley, S. D., & Yanofsky, M. F. (1995). Temporal relationship between the transcription of two Arabidopsis MADS box genes and the floral organ identity genes. The Plant Cell, 7(6), 721-733. doi:10.1105/tpc.7.6.721Colombo, M., Brambilla, V., Marcheselli, R., Caporali, E., Kater, M. M., & Colombo, L. (2010). A new role for the SHATTERPROOF genes during Arabidopsis gynoecium development. Developmental Biology, 337(2), 294-302. doi:10.1016/j.ydbio.2009.10.043Fourquin, C., & Ferrándiz, C. (2012). Functional analyses of AGAMOUS family members in Nicotiana benthamiana clarify the evolution of early and late roles of C-function genes in eudicots. The Plant Journal, 71(6), 990-1001. doi:10.1111/j.1365-313x.2012.05046.xKapoor, M., Tsuda, S., Tanaka, Y., Mayama, T., Okuyama, Y., Tsuchimoto, S., & Takatsuji, H. (2002). Role of petuniapMADS3in determination of floral organ and meristem identity, as revealed by its loss of function. The Plant Journal, 32(1), 115-127. doi:10.1046/j.1365-313x.2002.01402.xPan, I. L., McQuinn, R., Giovannoni, J. J., & Irish, V. F. (2010). Functional diversification of AGAMOUS lineage genes in regulating tomato flower and fruit development. Journal of Experimental Botany, 61(6), 1795-1806. doi:10.1093/jxb/erq046Pnueli, L., Hareven, D., Rounsley, S. D., Yanofsky, M. F., & Lifschitz, E. (1994). Isolation of the tomato AGAMOUS gene TAG1 and analysis of its homeotic role in transgenic plants. The Plant Cell, 6(2), 163-173. doi:10.1105/tpc.6.2.163Dreni, L., & Kater, M. M. (2013). MADSreloaded: evolution of theAGAMOUSsubfamily genes. New Phytologist, 201(3), 717-732. doi:10.1111/nph.12555Brunner, A. M. (2000). Plant Molecular Biology, 44(5), 619-634. doi:10.1023/a:1026550205851Perl-Treves, R., Kahana, A., Rosenman, N., Xiang, Y., & Silberstein, L. (1998). Expression of Multiple AGAMOUS-Like Genes in Male and Female Flowers of Cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.). Plant and Cell Physiology, 39(7), 701-710. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.pcp.a029424Yu, D., Kotilainen, M., Pöllänen, E., Mehto, M., Elomaa, P., Helariutta, Y., … Teeri, T. H. (1999). Organ identity genes and modified patterns of flower development in Gerbera hybrida (Asteraceae). The Plant Journal, 17(1), 51-62. doi:10.1046/j.1365-313x.1999.00351.xDong, Z., Zhao, Z., Liu, C., Luo, J., Yang, J., Huang, W., … Luo, D. (2005). Floral Patterning in Lotus japonicus. Plant Physiology, 137(4), 1272-1282. doi:10.1104/pp.104.054288Hofer, J. M., & Noel Ellis, T. (2014). Developmental specialisations in the legume family. Current Opinion in Plant Biology, 17, 153-158. doi:10.1016/j.pbi.2013.11.014Fourquin, C., del Cerro, C., Victoria, F. C., Vialette-Guiraud, A., de Oliveira, A. C., & Ferrándiz, C. (2013). A Change in SHATTERPROOF Protein Lies at the Origin of a Fruit Morphological Novelty and a New Strategy for Seed Dispersal in Medicago Genus. Plant Physiology, 162(2), 907-917. doi:10.1104/pp.113.217570Hewitt EJ (1966) Sand and Water Culture Methods Used in the Study of Plant Nutrition. Farnham Royal, UK: Commonwealth Agricultural Bureau.Cheng, X., Wang, M., Lee, H.-K., Tadege, M., Ratet, P., Udvardi, M., … Wen, J. (2013). An efficient reverse genetics platform in the model legumeMedicago truncatula. New Phytologist, 201(3), 1065-1076. doi:10.1111/nph.12575D’ Erfurth, I., Cosson, V., Eschstruth, A., Lucas, H., Kondorosi, A., & Ratet, P. (2003). Efficient transposition of theTnt1tobacco retrotransposon in the model legumeMedicago truncatula. The Plant Journal, 34(1), 95-106. doi:10.1046/j.1365-313x.2003.01701.xTadege, M., Ratet, P., & Mysore, K. S. (2005). Insertional mutagenesis: a Swiss Army knife for functional genomics of Medicago truncatula. Trends in Plant Science, 10(5), 229-235. doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2005.03.009Tadege, M., Wen, J., He, J., Tu, H., Kwak, Y., Eschstruth, A., … Mysore, K. S. (2008). Large-scale insertional mutagenesis using the Tnt1 retrotransposon in the model legume Medicago truncatula. The Plant Journal, 54(2), 335-347. doi:10.1111/j.1365-313x.2008.03418.xCheng, X., Wen, J., Tadege, M., Ratet, P., & Mysore, K. S. (2010). Reverse Genetics in Medicago truncatula Using Tnt1 Insertion Mutants. Plant Reverse Genetics, 179-190. doi:10.1007/978-1-60761-682-5_13Benlloch, R., d’ Erfurth, I., Ferrandiz, C., Cosson, V., Beltrán, J. P., Cañas, L. A., … Ratet, P. (2006). Isolation of mtpim Proves Tnt1 a Useful Reverse Genetics Tool in Medicago truncatula and Uncovers New Aspects of AP1-Like Functions in Legumes. Plant Physiology, 142(3), 972-983. doi:10.1104/pp.106.083543Larkin, M. A., Blackshields, G., Brown, N. P., Chenna, R., McGettigan, P. A., McWilliam, H., … Higgins, D. G. (2007). Clustal W and Clustal X version 2.0. Bioinformatics, 23(21), 2947-2948. doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btm404Altschul, S. (1997). Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Research, 25(17), 3389-3402. doi:10.1093/nar/25.17.3389Tamura, K., Dudley, J., Nei, M., & Kumar, S. (2007). MEGA4: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis (MEGA) Software Version 4.0. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 24(8), 1596-1599. doi:10.1093/molbev/msm092Dellaporta, S. L., Wood, J., & Hicks, J. B. (1983). A plant DNA minipreparation: Version II. Plant Molecular Biology Reporter, 1(4), 19-21. doi:10.1007/bf02712670Schmittgen, T. D., & Livak, K. J. (2008). Analyzing real-time PCR data by the comparative CT method. Nature Protocols, 3(6), 1101-1108. doi:10.1038/nprot.2008.73Constantin, G. D., Krath, B. N., MacFarlane, S. A., Nicolaisen, M., Elisabeth Johansen, I., & Lund, O. S. (2004). Virus-induced gene silencing as a tool for functional genomics in a legume species. The Plant Journal, 40(4), 622-631. doi:10.1111/j.1365-313x.2004.02233.xWesley, S. V., Helliwell, C. A., Smith, N. A., Wang, M., Rouse, D. T., Liu, Q., … Waterhouse, P. M. (2001). Construct design for efficient, effective and high-throughput gene silencing in plants. The Plant Journal, 27(6), 581-590. doi:10.1046/j.1365-313x.2001.01105.xGuerineau F, Mullineaux P (1993) Plant transformation and expression vectors. In: Croy R, editor. Plant Molecular Biology. Oxford, UK: Bios Scientific Publishers, Academic Press. pp. 121–147.Clough, S. J., & Bent, A. F. (1998). Floral dip: a simplified method forAgrobacterium-mediated transformation ofArabidopsis thaliana. The Plant Journal, 16(6), 735-743. doi:10.1046/j.1365-313x.1998.00343.xBenlloch, R., Roque, E., Ferrándiz, C., Cosson, V., Caballero, T., Penmetsa, R. V., … Madueño, F. (2009). Analysis of B function in legumes: PISTILLATA proteins do not require the PI motif for floral organ development inMedicago truncatula. The Plant Journal, 60(1), 102-111. doi:10.1111/j.1365-313x.2009.03939.xRoque, E., Serwatowska, J., Cruz Rochina, M., Wen, J., Mysore, K. S., Yenush, L., … Cañas, L. A. (2012). Functional specialization of duplicated AP3-like genes inMedicago truncatula. The Plant Journal, 73(4), 663-675. doi:10.1111/tpj.12068Flanagan, C. A., Hu, Y., & Ma, H. (1996). Specific expression of the AGL1 MADS-box gene suggests regulatory functions in Arabidopsis gynoecium and ovule development. The Plant Journal, 10(2), 343-353. doi:10.1046/j.1365-313x.1996.10020343.xSieburth, L. E., & Meyerowitz, E. M. (1997). Molecular dissection of the AGAMOUS control region shows that cis elements for spatial regulation are located intragenically. The Plant Cell, 9(3), 355-365. doi:10.1105/tpc.9.3.355Busch, M. A. (1999). Activation of a Floral Homeotic Gene in Arabidopsis. Science, 285(5427), 585-587. doi:10.1126/science.285.5427.585Moyroud, E., Minguet, E. G., Ott, F., Yant, L., Posé, D., Monniaux, M., … Parcy, F. (2011). Prediction of Regulatory Interactions from Genome Sequences Using a Biophysical Model for the Arabidopsis LEAFY Transcription Factor. The Plant Cell, 23(4), 1293-1306. doi:10.1105/tpc.111.083329Grønlund, M., Constantin, G., Piednoir, E., Kovacev, J., Johansen, I. E., & Lund, O. S. (2008). Virus-induced gene silencing in Medicago truncatula and Lathyrus odorata. Virus Research, 135(2), 345-349. doi:10.1016/j.virusres.2008.04.005Mandel, M. A., Bowman, J. L., Kempin, S. A., Ma, H., Meyerowitz, E. M., & Yanofsky, M. F. (1992). Manipulation of flower structure in transgenic tobacco. Cell, 71(1), 133-143. doi:10.1016/0092-8674(92)90272-eMizukami, Y., & Ma, H. (1992). Ectopic expression of the floral homeotic gene AGAMOUS in transgenic Arabidopsis plants alters floral organ identity. Cell, 71(1), 119-131. doi:10.1016/0092-8674(92)90271-dCannon, S. B., Sterck, L., Rombauts, S., Sato, S., Cheung, F., Gouzy, J., … Young, N. D. (2006). Legume genome evolution viewed through the Medicago truncatula and Lotus japonicus genomes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(40), 14959-14964. doi:10.1073/pnas.0603228103Young, N. D., & Bharti, A. K. (2012). Genome-Enabled Insights into Legume Biology. Annual Review of Plant Biology, 63(1), 283-305. doi:10.1146/annurev-arplant-042110-103754Jager, M. (2003). MADS-Box Genes in Ginkgo biloba and the Evolution of the AGAMOUS Family. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 20(5), 842-854. doi:10.1093/molbev/msg089Johansen, B., Pedersen, L. B., Skipper, M., & Frederiksen, S. (2002). MADS-box gene evolution—structure and transcription patterns. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 23(3), 458-480. doi:10.1016/s1055-7903(02)00032-5Rutledge, R., Regan, S., Nicolas, O., Fobert, P., Côté, C., Bosnich, W., … Stewart, D. (1998). Characterization of an AGAMOUS homologue from the conifer black spruce ( Picea mariana ) that produces floral homeotic conversions when expressed in Arabidopsis. The Plant Journal, 15(5), 625-634. doi:10.1046/j.1365-313x.1998.00250.xParcy, F., Nilsson, O., Busch, M. A., Lee, I., & Weigel, D. (1998). A genetic framework for floral patterning. Nature, 395(6702), 561-566. doi:10.1038/26903Causier, B., Bradley, D., Cook, H., & Davies, B. (2009). Conserved intragenic elements were critical for the evolution of the floral C-function. The Plant Journal, 58(1), 41-52. doi:10.1111/j.1365-313x.2008.03759.xAiroldi, C. A., & Davies, B. (2012). Gene Duplication and the Evolution of Plant MADS-box Transcription Factors. Journal of Genetics and Genomics, 39(4), 157-165. doi:10.1016/j.jgg.2012.02.008Giménez, E., Pineda, B., Capel, J., Antón, M. T., Atarés, A., Pérez-Martín, F., … Lozano, R. (2010). Functional Analysis of the Arlequin Mutant Corroborates the Essential Role of the ARLEQUIN/TAGL1 Gene during Reproductive Development of Tomato. PLoS ONE, 5(12), e14427. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0014427Kater, M. M., Colombo, L., Franken, J., Busscher, M., Masiero, S., Van Lookeren Campagne, M. M., & Angenent, G. C. (1998). Multiple AGAMOUS Homologs from Cucumber and Petunia Differ in Their Ability to Induce Reproductive Organ Fate. The Plant Cell, 10(2), 171-182. doi:10.1105/tpc.10.2.171Tsuchimoto, S., van der Krol, A. R., & Chua, N. H. (1993). Ectopic expression of pMADS3 in transgenic petunia phenocopies the petunia blind mutant. The Plant Cell, 5(8), 843-853. doi:10.1105/tpc.5.8.843Airoldi, C. A., Bergonzi, S., & Davies, B. (2010). Single amino acid change alters the ability to specify male or female organ identity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(44), 18898-18902. doi:10.1073/pnas.1009050107Causier, B., Castillo, R., Zhou, J., Ingram, R., Xue, Y., Schwarz-Sommer, Z., & Davies, B. (2005). Evolution in Action: Following Function in Duplicated Floral Homeotic Genes. Current Biology, 15(16), 1508-1512. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2005.07.063Birchler, J. A., & Veitia, R. A. (2007). The Gene Balance Hypothesis: From Classical Genetics to Modern Genomics. The Plant Cell, 19(2), 395-402. doi:10.1105/tpc.106.049338Birchler, J. A., & Veitia, R. A. (2009). The gene balance hypothesis: implications for gene regulation, quantitative traits and evolution. New Phytologist, 186(1), 54-62. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.03087.xEdger, P. P., & Pires, J. C. (2009). Gene and genome duplications: the impact of dosage-sensitivity on the fate of nuclear genes. Chromosome Research, 17(5), 699-717. doi:10.1007/s10577-009-9055-9Freeling, M. (2006). Gene-balanced duplications, like tetraploidy, provide predictable drive to increase morphological complexity. Genome Research, 16(7), 805-814. doi:10.1101/gr.368140