Advertisement

Theoretical and Applied Genetics

, Volume 81, Issue 2, pp 277–284 | Cite as

Insertional mutagenesis in Arabidopsis thaliana: isolation of a T-DNA-linked mutation that alters leaf morphology

  • M. Van Lijsebettens
  • R. Vanderhaeghen
  • M. Van Montagu
Article

Summary

We investigated the potential of the Agrobacterium tumefaciens T-DNA as an insertional mutagen in Arabidopsis thaliana. Arabidopsis lines transformed with different T-DNA vectors were generated using a leaf disc infection procedure adapted for efficient selection on either kanamycin or hygromycin medium. A standardized screening procedure was developed for the detection of recessive mutations in T2 populations of regenerated and/or transformed lines. Recessive mutations originating from the tissue culture procedure occurred at a low frequency — between 2% and 5%. Within 110 transformed lines that contained a total of about 150 T-DNA inserts, one recessive mutation, named pfl, cosegregated with a specific T-DNA copy. This pfl mutation mainly affected the morphology of the first seedling leaves under normal growth conditions and was mapped to chromosome 1. No recombination between the pfl locus and the kanamycin resistance marker on the T-DNA was detected when screening F2 and F3 populations of a mutant crossed to the wild type. The maximal genetic distance between the pfl locus and the kanamycin resistance gene, determined as 0.4±0.4 cMorgan, strongly suggests that the pfl mutation is induced by the insertion of the T-DNA. Our finding of one T-DNA-linked recessive mutation in 110 transgenic lines indicates that T-DNA can be used for mutagenization of the Arabidopsis genome under tissue culture conditions.

Key words

Agrobacterium tumefaciens Insertional mutagenesis Linkage analysis Selectable marker genes Transformation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allard RW (1956) Formulas and tables to facilitate the calculation of recombination values in heredity. Hilgardia 24: 235–278Google Scholar
  2. André D, Colau D, Schell J, Van Montagu M, Hernalsteens J-P (1986) Gene tagging in plants by a T-DNA insertion mutagen that generates APH (3′)II-plant gene fusions. Mol Gen Genet 204: 512–518Google Scholar
  3. Baus AD, Franzmann L, Meinke DW (1986) Growth in vitro of arrested embryos from lethal mutants of Arabidopsis thaliana. Theor Appl Genet 72: 577–586Google Scholar
  4. Bingham PM, Levis R, Rubin GM (1981) Cloning of DNA sequences from the white locus of D. melanogaster by a novel and general method. Cell 25: 693–704Google Scholar
  5. Budar F, Deboeck F, Van Montagu M, Hernalsteens J-P (1986) Introduction and expression of the octopine T-DNA oncogenes in tobacco plants and their progeny. Plant Sci 46: 195–206Google Scholar
  6. De Block M (1988) Genotype-independent leaf disc transformation of potato (Solarium tuberosum) using Agrobacterium tumefaciens. Theor Appl Genet 76: 767–774Google Scholar
  7. De Block M, Botterman J, Vandewiele M, Dockx J, Thoen C, Gosselé V, Movva R, Thompson C, Van Montagu M, Leemans J (1987) Engineering herbicide resistance in plants by expression of a detoxifying enzyme. EMBO J 3: 1681–1689Google Scholar
  8. Deblaere R, Bytebier B, De Greve H, Deboeck F, Schell J, Van Montagu M, Leemans J (1985) Efficient octopine Ti plasmid-derived vectors for Agrobacteriummediated gene transfer to plants. Nucleic Acids Res 13: 4777–4788Google Scholar
  9. Feldmann KA, Marks MD, Christianson ML, Quatrano RS (1989) A dwarf mutant of Arabidopsis generated by T-DNA insertion mutagenesis. Science 243: 1351–1354Google Scholar
  10. Gamborg OL, Miller RA, Ojima K (1968) Nutrient requirements of suspension cultures of soybean root cells. Exp Cell Res 50: 151–158PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Gheysen G, Herman L, Breyne P, Van Montagu M, Depicker A (1989) Agrobacterium tumefaciens as a tool for the genetic transformation of plants. In Butler LO, Harwood C, Moseley BEB (eds) Genetic transformation and expression. Intercept, Andover, pp 151–174Google Scholar
  12. Gridley T, Soriano P, Jaenisch R (1987) Insertional mutagenesis in mice. Trends Genet 3: 162–166Google Scholar
  13. Haughn GW, Somerville CR (1988) Genetic control of morphogenesis in Arabidopsis. Dev. Genet 9: 73–89Google Scholar
  14. Herman PL, Marks MD (1989) Trichome development in Arabidopsis thaliana. II. Isolation and complementation of the GLABROUS1 gene. Plant Cell 1: 1051–1055Google Scholar
  15. Koncz C, Martini N, Mayerhofer R, Koncz-Kalman Z, Körber H, Redei GP, Schell J (1989) High-frequency T-DNA-mediated gene tagging in plants. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 86: 8467–8471Google Scholar
  16. Koncz C, Mayerhofer R, Koncz-Kalman Z, Nawrath C, Reiss B, Redei P, Shell J (1990) Isolation of a gene encoding a novel chloroplast protein by T-DNA tagging in Arabidopsis thaliana. EMBO J 9: 1337–1346Google Scholar
  17. Koornneef M (1987) Genetic map of Arabidopsis thaliana In: O'Brien SJ (ed) Genetic maps, vol. 4. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor N. Y, pp 742–745Google Scholar
  18. Koornneef M, Stam P (1987) Procedure for mapping by using F2 and F3 populations. Arabidopsis Inf Serv 25: 35–40Google Scholar
  19. Koornneef M, Hanhart CJ, Van Loenen Martinet EP, Van Der Veen JH (1986) A marker line, that allows the detection of linkage on all Arabidopsis chromosome. Arabidopsis Inf Serv 23: 46–50Google Scholar
  20. Lee M, Phillips RL (1988) The chromosomal basis of somaclonal variation. Annu Rev Plant Physiol Plant Mol Biol 39: 413–437Google Scholar
  21. Lloyd AM, Barnason AR, Rogers SG, Byrne MG, Fraley RT, Horsch RB (1986) Transformation of Arabidopsis thaliana with Agrobacterium tumefaciens. Science 234: 464–466Google Scholar
  22. Marks DM, Feldmann KA (1989) Trichome development in Arabidopsis thaliana. I. T-DNA tagging of the GLABROUS1 gene. Plant Cell 1: 1043–1050Google Scholar
  23. Meyerowitz EM (1987) Arabidopsis thaliana. Annu Rev Genet 21: 93–111Google Scholar
  24. Murashige T, Skoog F (1962) A revised medium for rapid growth and bioassays with tobacco tissue cultures. Physiol. Plant 15: 473–497Google Scholar
  25. Schweizer D, Peuker K, Loidl J (1990) Abstracts of the Fourth International Conference on Arabidopsis Research. Vienna, University of ViennaGoogle Scholar
  26. Scowcroft WR (1985) Somaclonal variation: the myth of clonal uniformity. In: Hohn B, Dennis ES (eds) Genetic flux in plants. (Advances in plant gene research, vol 2). Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 217–245Google Scholar
  27. Shepherd NS (1988) Transposable elements and gene-tagging. In:Shaw CH (ed) Plant molecular biology, a practical approach. IRL Press, Oxford, pp 187–220Google Scholar
  28. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1981) Biometry, 2nd edn. Freeman, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  29. Valvekens D, Van Montagu M, Van Lijsebettens M (1988) Agrobacterium tumefaciensmediated transformation of Arabidopsis root expiants using kanamycin selection. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 85: 5536–5540Google Scholar
  30. Vandekerckhove J, Van Damme J, Van Lijsebettens M, Botterman J, De Block M, Vandewiele M, De Clercq A, Leemans J, Van Montagu M, Krebbers E (1989) Enkephalins produced in transgenic plants using modified 2S seed storage proteins. Bio/technology 7: 929–932Google Scholar
  31. Weising K, Kahl G, Schell J (1988) Transfer, structure and expression of foreign genes in plants. In: Kahl G (ed) Architecture of eukaryotic genes. VCH Verlag, Weinheim, pp 57–87Google Scholar
  32. Zambryski P (1988) Basic processes underlying Agrobacterium-mediated DNA transfer to plant cells. Annu Rev Genet 22: 1–30Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Van Lijsebettens
    • 1
  • R. Vanderhaeghen
    • 1
  • M. Van Montagu
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratorium voor Genetica, Rijksuniversiteit GentGentBelgium

Personalised recommendations