Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

35S promoter-driven transgenes are variably expressed in different organs of Arabidopsis thaliana and in response to abiotic stress

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Molecular Biology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The cauliflower mosaic virus (CaMV) 35S promoter is known as the most frequently used promoter in plant biotechnology. Although it is widely considered to be a strong constitutive promoter exhibiting high transcriptional activity, the transcriptional stability of CaMV 35S has not been extensively studied. Using the model plant species Arabidopsis thaliana, this study aimed for a comprehensive expression analysis of two widely used plant transgenes, neomycin phosphotransferase II (NPTII) and enhanced green fluorescent protein (EGFP), regulated by a double CaMV 35S promoter depending on the organ type, time of day, plant age, and in response to abiotic stress conditions. Quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR) analysis revealed that the NPTII and EGFP transcript levels were markedly higher in the cotyledons, young leaves, and roots than in the inflorescences, stems, and adult leaves of three independent transgenic A. thaliana lines. The expression of NPTII and EGFP varied during the day and was elevated with the plant age. Drought and cold stress considerably affected the expression of the transgenes, while heat, high salinity, and wounding had no significant effect. This study shows that transgenes driven by a common constitutive promoter can exhibit marked variations in transcriptional activity depending on plant organ, physiological conditions, and in response to abiotic stress. Therefore, to ensure high and stable transgene activity, considerable attention should be given to the transgenic plant material and incubation conditions before harvesting the plant material.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets used and analyzed during the current study are included in this published article and supplementary material.

References

  1. Odell JT, Nagy F, Chua NH (1985) Identification of DNA-sequences required for activity of the cauliflower mosaic virus-35s promoter. Nature 313:810–812

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Somssich M (2019) A short history of the CaMV 35S promoter. PeerJ Prep 7:e27096v3

    Google Scholar 

  3. Dutt M, Dhekney SA, Soriano L, Kandel R, Grosser JW (2014) Temporal and spatial control of gene expression in horticultural crops. Hortic Res 1:14047

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bak A, Emerson JB (2020) Cauliflower mosaic virus (CaMV) biology, management, and relevance to GM plant detection for dustainable organic agriculture. Front Sustain Food Syst 4:21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kay R, Chan A, Daly M, McPherson J (1987) Duplication of CaMV 35S promoter sequences creates a strong enhancer for plant genes. Science 236:1299–1302

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Holtorf S, Apel K, Bohlmann H (1995) Comparison of different constitutive and inducible promoters for the overexpression of transgenes in Arabidopsis thaliana. Plant Mol Biol 29:637–646

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Hraška M, Rakouský S, Čurn V (2008) Tracking of the CaMV-35S promoter performance in GFP transgenic tobacco, with a special emphasis on flowers and reproductive organs, confirmed its predominant activity in vascular tissues. Plant Cell Tissue Org Cult 94:239–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Jiang P, Zhang K, Ding Z, He Q, Li W, Zhu S, Cheng W, Zhang K, Li K (2018) Characterization of a strong and constitutive promoter from the Arabidopsis serine carboxypeptidase-like gene AtSCPL30 as a potential tool for crop transgenic breeding. BMC Biotechnol 18:59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Battraw MJ, Hall TC (1990) Histochemical analysis of CaMV 35S promoter-Beta-glucuronidase gene expression in transgenic rice plants. Plant Mol Biol 15:527–538

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Stefanov I, Fekete S, Bögre L, Pauk J, Fehér A, Dudits D (1994) Differential activity of the mannopine synthase and the CaMV 35S promoters during development of transgenic rapeseed plants. Plant Sci 95:175–186

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Lemmetyinen J, Keinonen-Mettälä K, Lännenpää M, von Weissenberg K, Sopanen T (1998) Activity of the CaMV 35S promoter in various parts of transgenic early flowering birch clones. Plant Cell Rep 18:243–248

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Williamson JD, Hirsch-Wyncott ME, Larkins BA, Gelvin SB (1989) Differential accumulation of a transcript driven by the CaMV 35S promoter in transgenic tobacco. Plant Physiol 90(4):1570–1576

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Pret’ova A, Obert B, Wetzstein HY (2001) Leaf developmental stage and tissue location affect the detection of beta-glucuronidase in transgenic tobacco plants. Biotechnol Lett 23:555–558

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Schnurr JA, Guerra DJ (2000) The CaMV-35S promoter is sensitive to shortened photoperiod in transgenic tobacco. Plant Cell Rep 19:279–282

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Aronen T, Hohtola A, Laukkanen H, Haggman H (1995) Seasonal changes in the transient expression of a 35S CaMV-GUS gene construct introduced into Scots pine buds. Tree Physiol 15:65–70

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Boyko A, Molinier J, Chatter W, Laroche A, Kovalchuk I (2010) Acute but not chronic exposure to abiotic stress results in transient reduction of expression levels of the transgene driven by the 35S promoter. New Biotechnol 27:70–77

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Tzfira T, Tian GW, Lacroix B, Vyas S, Li JX, Leitner-Dagan Y, Krichevsky A, Taylor T, Vainstein A, Citovsky V (2005) PSAT vectors: a modular series of plasmids for autofluorescent protein tagging and expression of multiple genes in plants. Plant Mol Biol 57:503–516

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Zhang X, Henriques R, Lin SS, Niu QW, Chua NH (2006) Agrobacterium-mediated transformation of Arabidopsis thaliana using the floral dip method. Nat Protoc 1:641–646

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Dubrovina AS, Aleynova OA, Kalachev AV, Suprun AR, Ogneva ZV, Kiselev KV (2019) Induction of transgene suppression in plants via external application of synthetic dsRNA. Int J Mol Sci 20:1585

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Kiselev KV, Dubrovina AS, Shumakova OA, Karetin YA, Manyakhin AY (2013) Structure and expression profiling of a novel calcium-dependent protein kinase gene, CDPK3a, in leaves, stems, grapes, and cell cultures of wild-growing grapevine Vitis amurensis Rupr. Plant Cell Rep 32:431–442

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Kiselev KV, Tynin AP, Karetin YA (2013) Influence of 5-azacytidine and salicylic acid on demethylase gene expression in cell cultures of Vitis amurensis Rupr. Acta Physiol Plant 35:1843–1851

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Dubrovina AS, Kiselev KV, Khristenko VS, Aleynova OA (2015) VaCPK20, a calcium-dependent protein kinase gene of wild grapevine Vitis amurensis Rupr., mediates cold and drought stress tolerance. J Plant Physiol 185:1–12

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Czechowski T, Stitt M, Altmann T, Udvardi MK, Scheible WR (2005) Genome-wide identification and testing of superior reference genes for transcript normalization in Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol 139:5–17

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Livak KJ, Schmittgen TD (2001) Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2(-Delta Delta C(T)) method. Methods 25:402–408

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Dubrovina AS, Kiselev KV, Khristenko VS, Aleynova OA (2017) The calcium-dependent protein kinase gene VaCPK29 is involved in grapevine responses to heat and osmotic stresses. Plant Growth Regul 82:79–89

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was supported by a grant from the Russian Science Foundation (19-74-10023).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Biotechnology, Federal Scientific Center of the East Asia Terrestrial Biodiversity, Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Vladivostok, Russia, 690022

    Konstantin V. Kiselev, Olga A. Aleynova, Zlata V. Ogneva, Andrey R. Suprun & Alexandra S. Dubrovina

Authors
  1. Konstantin V. Kiselev
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Olga A. Aleynova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zlata V. Ogneva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Andrey R. Suprun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Alexandra S. Dubrovina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

ASD and KVK performed research design, experiments, data analysis, and paper preparation. OAA, ARS, and ZVO performed qRT-PCRs and were involved in plant management, RNA isolations.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexandra S. Dubrovina.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Research involving human and/or animal participants

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 191 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kiselev, K.V., Aleynova, O.A., Ogneva, Z.V. et al. 35S promoter-driven transgenes are variably expressed in different organs of Arabidopsis thaliana and in response to abiotic stress. Mol Biol Rep 48, 2235–2241 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11033-021-06235-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11033-021-06235-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation